United States 

Department 

of Agriculture 

www.ers.usda.gov 

 A Report from the Economic Research Service

Abstract

Government programs and subsidies regulate and support Japan’s large fruit-production 

sector, bolstering farm incomes and output levels. Supply-management programs that 

target annual production levels for some fruits, in order to maintain market prices, contribute to higher prices for consumers, although other programs aim to increase fruit 

consumption. Japan’s tariffs and phytosanitary measures also create barriers to fruit 

consumption and limit imports. Producers in the United States, a major fruit supplier to 

Japan, could benefi t from reduced barriers. 

Keywords

Japan, fruits, policies, production, subsidies, insurance, farm markets, tariffs, phytosanitary measures 

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the review and comments of Molly Garber, 

Lewrene Glaser, Sophia Huang, Gary Lucier, Mary Anne Normile, Agnes Perez, and 

Susan Pollack, Economic Research Service; Hyunok Lee, University of California at 

Davis; Thomas Marsh, Washington State University; William Gorman and Hiroshi 

Mori, New Mexico State University; Carol Goodloe, Offi ce of the Chief Economist; 

and Reed Blauer and Shari Kosco, Foreign Agricultural Service. Editorial and design 

support was provided by Angela Anderson.

Kenzo Ito, kenzo.ito@fas.usda.gov

John Dyck, jdyck@ers.usda.gov

Fruit Policies in Japan

FTS-341-01

April 2010

Contents

Approved by USDA’s 

World Agricultural 

Outlook Board

Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Domestic Policies. . . . . . . . . . .6

Border Policies. . . . . . . . . . . .11

Policy Implications . . . . . . . .16

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Appendix: 

 

Previous Fruit Policies . . . .22
2

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Japan is a large market for fruits and its consumers spend $10 billion per 

year (wholesale value) on fresh and preserved fruits.1 The United States, the 

second-largest foreign supplier of fruits to Japan, sent about $450 million in 

fruit exports to Japan in 2009—10 percent of total U.S. fruit exports (table 

1).2 Japanese Government policies regarding this large market affect U.S. 

fruit exports and offer a point of comparison for other developed countries, 

including the United States. This report is one in a series examining Japan’s 

policies that protect and regulate its agricultural markets. Japan’s policies 

affect existing trade patterns and are relevant to the current round of global 

trade negotiations conducted by the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Fruit demand in Japan appears to be declining. Japan’s population, currently 

at about 127 million people, has also begun to decrease. Consumption of 

traditionally important fruits, such as citrus fruits and apples, has been 

declining, while consumption of some minor fruits, such as blueberries, has 

increased. Expenditures on fruits for consumption at home have decreased 

(fi g. 1). Japanese consumers are increasing their purchases of food away 

from home, but data on fruit consumption in restaurants and other venues are 

not available. Consumer prices for fruits have been stable, both in absolute 

terms and relative to the general price index, except for a spike in 2007 (fi g. 

2).3 Although not a growing market, Japan’s fruit consumption remains large 

and economically signifi cant.

Fruit production, by volume, declined about 20 percent from the 3-year 

average for 1994-96 to the average for 2004-06. Japan produces many fruit 

crops, benefi ting from the climatic variation, both in latitude and in elevation above sea level, that the long string of mountainous islands offers. 

The leading fruit produced in Japan, by volume, is the mikan tangerine (or 

unshu), followed by apples, melons, pears, persimmons, grapes, strawberries, 

Introduction

1 1.193 trillion yen, from Statistical 

Yearbook of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2007-08, 

p. 550. 

2 U.S. exports of fruits and fruit preparations, not including fruit juice.

3 Weather-related problems in North 

America (oranges and lemons) and low 

yields in Japan (mikan tangerines, persimmons, peaches, and others) reduced 

supplies and pushed prices higher in 

2007.

Table 1

U.S. fruit exports to Japan, 2004-08 

 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Average Japan tariff 

 2007-09 or tariff range

 1,000 U.S. dollars1 Percent

Grapefruit, fresh 120,234 65,542 97,498 139,426 99,816 97,436 112,226 10

Cherries, all forms2 85,521 86,935 58,838 62,484 67,636 70,092 66,737 8.5-17

Lemons, fresh 33,997 34,973 36,747 81,021 66,646 47,261 64,976 0

Oranges, fresh 50,987 58,518 67,473 41,893 71,747 61,322 58,321 16-32

Strawberries, all forms2 39,466 32,829 34,894 34,311 38,251 30,531 34,364 6-12

Raisins 28,756 30,805 27,101 30,557 34,328 30,531 31,805 1.2

Prunes 34,539 30,746 31,624 31,528 28,072 28,172 29,257 2.4

Blueberries, all forms2 22,457 25,609 24,490 26,693 28,098 22,014 25,784 6-12

Grapes, fresh 7,283 4,870 7,774 5,652 4,670 5,898 5,407 7.8-17

Melons, 

 except watermelons 5,936 6,115 4,970 5,250 6,667 7,591 6,503 6-12

Other fruit, 

 except juices 54,462 50,245 51,407 45,821 46,861 47,435 46,524 0-25

Total 483,638 427,187 442,816 504,636 492,792 448,283 481,904

1 Nominal dollars, not adjusted for infl ation. 

2 “All forms” means fresh, frozen, dried, and otherwise preserved. 

Source: ERS calculations based on data from Foreign Agricultural Trade of the United States database and table 4.
3

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

and peaches (table 2). The planted area and production of these fruits have 

gradually declined in recent years. Cherries are one of the few fruits in Japan 

with recent growth in area planted. 

From 1994-96 to 2004-06, the quantity of fruits and nuts that Japan imported 

grew by almost 9 percent. Foreign producers often have advantages, such as 

low labor costs, that make imports competitive with Japan’s domestic products. Japan does not have extensive areas suitable for tropical fruits, and its 

high humidity limits some fruit production. Japan’s orchards and fi elds tend 

to be smaller than those in some exporting nations, both for topographic and 

historical reasons, potentially limiting Japan’s ability to achieve economies of 

size. 

Bananas are Japan’s largest fruit import, by volume, followed by citrus fruits 

(table 2). Banana imports have remained relatively stable since 1999, while 

citrus fruit imports have declined since 1994. Pineapples are among the few 

fresh fruits with increasing import levels. Frozen fruit import volume grew 

until 2005, but has remained stable since. The Philippines have become the 

largest source for Japan’s fruit imports (40 percent of value in 2008), followed 

by the United States (25 percent). Other countries supply small shares of the 

import market, but collectively provide almost 35 percent of Japan’s imports 

(fi g. 3).

Japanese fruit farms face a variety of structural problems: 

• More aging farmers and fewer new farmers; 

• Ineffi cient farm infrastructure; and 

• A shortage of young leaders in agriculture (see box, “Structural Change 

in Fruit Farming”). 

Figure 1

Annual fruit expenditures per Japanese household 

(for at-home consumption)

1,000 yen

Source: Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Family 

Income and Expenditure Survey.

0

25

50

 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Figure 2

Fruit prices in Japan: Consumer price index (CPI) 

for fruits/consumer prices for all goods

Index, 2005=100

Note: CPI for fruits divided by CPI for all goods multiplied by 100. 

Source: ERS calculations based on Portal Site of Official Statistics of 

Japan, Statistics Bureau.

0

60

120

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
4

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Table 2

Japan’s production and imports of fresh fruit 

 Japan’s production, Import volume, 2008 Japan’s tariff 

Fruit crop 2007 From all sources From the United States or tariff range 

 Metric tons Percent

Mandarin 

 oranges/tangerines 1,066,000 10,228 7,780 17

Apples 840,100 37 0 17

Watermelons 421,600 99 61 6

Japanese pears 296,800 80 0 4.8

Persimmons 244,800 0 0 6

Other melons 221,300 31,073 6,612 6

Grapes 209,100 6,612 1,669 7.8-17

Strawberries 191,400 3,278 3,087 6

Peaches 150,200 0 0 6

Mume apricots 120,600 0 0 6

Kiwifruit 32,800 59,222 81 6.4

Other pears 29,600 0 0 4.8

Plums 21,900 0 0 6

Cherries 16,600 8,525 8,454 8.5

Pineapples 10,400 144,408 0 17

Oranges 9,000 97,818 71,486 16-32

Lemons and limes 5,250 59,357 36,728 0

Mangoes, guavas 2,300 11,589 285 0-3

Bananas 205 1,092,738 0 10-25

Grapefruit 0 184,022 126,097 10

Papaya NA 3,817 889 0-2

Sources: ERS calculations based on Statistical Yearbook of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2007-2008; USDA Production, 

Supply and Distribution database; United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization, FAOSTAT; World Trade Atlas; table 4.

Figure 3

Japan’s fruit imports, by country of origin

Million U.S. dollars

Note: Commodities with over $100 million import value from one country are listed in the originating country section. 

Source: ERS calculations based on Japan trade statistics. Fruit categories included are those found in chapter 8 of the Harmonized System.

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Citrus

Bananas and pineapples

Kiwi

 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Others China Mexico New Zealand United States Philippines
5

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

As in other countries, weather conditions affect Japan’s fruit crops and sometimes create unbalanced supply-demand situations in the market. Therefore, 

market prices are fairly volatile and Japanese farmers often face unstable 

income prospects, especially if domestic demand is static. To address these 

issues, Government policies try to mitigate structural and market volatility in 

order to support and stabilize farmers’ incomes. 

Some Government policies help fi nance the adjustment to a larger-scale 

farm structure, and others regulate production, reduce risk, and support 

prices, with the goal of maintaining income. These policies include border 

protection. Some policies also aim to increase domestic demand. Changes to 

Japan’s domestic fruit policies legislated in 2005 went into effect in 2007. The 

changes refl ect the Japanese Government’s intent to stimulate larger-scale 

agricultural production and yet to maintain relatively comprehensive support 

to all producers. These domestic regulations and subsidies, import taxes, and 

phytosanitary rules help defi ne the Japanese market for imported fruit.

Structural change in Japan’s fruit farming industry has been slow. Since 1990, fruit area, output, and the number of farm 

households have all declined, with little indication that average farm size or per-hectare yield has increased (see fi gure below). 

Japan’s topography and land ownership structure are not favorable to create large, unifi ed farm operations. A thorough land 

reform after World War II helped keep Japan’s farmland divided into millions of small holdings. These relatively small and 

scattered areas may be suitable for fruit production but would be quite expensive to consolidate by private owners. New 

policies encourage contract farming, renting out, cooperative farming, and other solutions that apply to all crops. 

Japan’s 2005 Census of Agriculture counted almost 300,000 farms that produced fruit in orchards, fi elds, or greenhouses, 

including many small-scale, part-time growers. In 2006, the last year with available data, 48,000 households growing fruit 

were classifi ed as “business farms.” This 

meant that the household received over 

50 percent of its income from farming, 

that at least one family member spent 60 

days or more on farm activities, and that 

the farmer was younger than 65 years. 

The Government is eager to support 

the business farm and would like to see 

it proliferate by absorbing some of the 

part-time operations. This type of farm, 

however, has been decreasing in Japan, 

chiefl y because farmers are aging beyond 

65 years. In response, the Government 

continues to change its policy measures 

to encourage younger farmers to replace 

this aging population.

Structural Change in Fruit Farming

Number of fruit farms, area, and output

Index: 1990=100

Note: Specialized households are those engaged just in fruit farming. 

Source: ERS calculations based on data from the Statistical Yearbook, Ministry of Agriculture, 

Forestry and Fisheries.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Specialized households Area Output
6

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Japan’s domestic fruit policies are based on the 1961 Act on Special Measures 

Concerning the Promotion of Fruit-Growing Industries. Since then, the 

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) has revised the Basic 

Policy for Fruit Industry Promotion (which implemented the 1961 Act) several 

times. In the most recent revision (spring 2005), Japan ended its existing 

policies supporting fruit markets and replaced them with a new set that went 

into effect on April 1, 2007.4 Some of the new policies are similar to previous 

ones, and some are different. The 2005 Basic Policy looked at fruit production, farm management, distribution, exports, and consumption and suggested 

measures to revitalize Japan’s fruit agriculture over a 10-year horizon. 

The 2005 Basic Policy’s key elements include: 

• Reform of the fruit farming structure;

• The fostering of future agricultural leaders;

• Supply-demand adjustments;

• Management assistance and programs to help stabilize farm income; and 

• Risk management tools (unchanged by the 2005 Basic Policy).

Japan’s fruit-growing sector faces signifi cant challenges, including insuffi cient farm labor, ineffi cient farm infrastructure, infl exible farmland usage, 

and other problems that lead to declining harvested areas and fruit production. In the 2005 Basic Policy, MAFF encourages the establishment of local 

farmers’ committees to formulate a strategic plan for the next 5-10 years that 

focuses on structural reform to revitalize fruit-farming communities. The 

committees’ plans should consider the viability of farming, future leadership, 

marketing, production, labor issues, and the like. MAFF strongly suggests 

that the plan should be developed by farmers. 

Japan’s policymakers and fruit farmers believe that the current structure of 

Japanese agriculture is unsustainable, because aging farmers are not likely 

to be replaced in equal measure by new farmers. The most recent policy 

changes (including the 2005 fruit policies) try to redirect Government funds 

toward farmers who are capable of expanding the size of their operations 

and who are adept at anticipating market changes and adjusting their output 

in response. Because previous policies subsidized all farmers, redirection of 

funds in 2007 means some farmers will get less funding than before. 

On the demand side, the Basic Policy for Food, Agriculture and Rural Villages, 

which was issued by MAFF in March 2005, promoted consumption of locally 

grown fruits in the school lunch program and through farmers’ markets. 

Policy Measures Affecting Management, 

Supply and Demand, and Income

In April 2007, the Japanese Government put new measures into place for fruit 

farming and replaced the previous price-subsidy scheme with a new market 

stabilization program. These measures aim to stabilize farm businesses and 

Domestic Policies

4 The old policies included an income 

stabilization program related to farmgate prices for fruit; national supplydemand management to prevent prices 

from falling below desired levels; and 

payments to plant orchards in diverted 

rice paddies. These policies are described briefl y in “Appendix: Previous 

Fruit Policies.”
7

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

farm income, in part, by improving farm structure in fruit producing regions. 

The new fruit measures include two programs (effective from April 2007 to 

March 2011): 

1. The Fruit Farm Management Support Program

2. The Fruit Supply-Demand Stabilization Program

The Fruit Farm Management Support Program 

This program provides subsidies to farmers who transplant better fruit cultivars, improve farm infrastructure, hire labor, etc. The program applies to all 

fruit categories and has two tiers. The fi rst tier helps farmers improve their 

production infrastructure, and the second helps agricultural producer cooperatives reform fruit production structures. 

Subsidies are available to farmers for converting to better cultivars, grafting 

trees, or abandoning unproductive orchards/groves (table 3). Fruit farmers are 

also eligible to receive subsidies of up to half the total cost of infrastructure 

changes, such as improving farm roads, leveling hilly lands, improving the 

soil, and upgrading the waterways. These subsidies are only provided for two 

fruit crops: Mikan tangerines and apples. These fruits account for 60 percent 

of Japan’s total fruit production. This program runs from April 1, 2007, to 

March 31, 2011, with a budget of 4.75 billion yen ($54.1 million) for each of 

the 4 years.

These subsidies help farmers expand, update, or abandon their orchards. The 

implicit intent is to encourage fruit farm restructuring, where younger, fulltime farmers expand or update their production and older, smaller farmers 

exit the industry. 

Subsidies are available to agricultural producers’ cooperatives for production reform measures and cover up to half of the cost. Producer cooperatives 

are important in Japanese horticulture, as they set up collection, sorting, and 

packing facilities and arrange for marketing. Activities eligible for subsidy 

support include:

• Developing a reliable farm labor supply system;

• Developing an information system that supports farm leaders;

Table 3

Subsidies to encourage productivity and structural changes for fruit farming

Activity Eligible fruit stock Subsidy amount

 Yen/10a1 U.S. dollars/acre2

Transplanting trees Mikan tangerines 220,000 8,611

 Apples for dwarfi ng purposes 320,000 12,524

 Apples of regular cultivars 160,000 6,262

 Other fruit cultivars Up to half the cost 

Grafting trees All fruit cultivars Up to half the cost 

Abandoning unproductive Mikan tangerines 100,000 3,914

 orchards or groves Apples 80,000 3,131

 Other fruit trees Up to half the cost 

1 10a (10 ares) are equal to 0.2471 acre. 

2 The average exchange rate was 103.4 yen per U.S. dollar in 2008. 

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan (MAFF).
8

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

• Setting up large-scale seedling facilities;

• Supporting new technologies; and

• Supporting market development.

The Fruit Supply-Demand Stabilization Program 

This program focuses on stabilizing market prices by adjusting production volumes and/or adjusting shipping volumes to the fresh market. It is 

similar to the Supply-Demand Adjustment Program that operated in 2001-07 

(see, “Appendix: Previous Fruit Policies”). Japan’s Government notifi ed the 

WTO that it spent 1.2 billion yen annually between 2001 and 2005 ($9.5-11 

million U.S. dollars) on payments related to price, presumably for the SupplyDemand Adjustment Program.5 Spending levels for the new program are 

not available. Currently, this program applies to only two major fruit crops: 

Mikan tangerines and apples. There are two tiers for this program: (1) the 

Planned Fruit Production project, and (2) the Emergency Supply-Demand 

Adjustment project. 

The Planned Fruit Production Project. Each year, MAFF, local governments, and grower cooperatives set an adequate shipment volume for the 

season based on supply and demand projections and then inform local grower 

cooperatives so they can adjust their production to meet production targets. 

The production adjustment is usually carried out by culling fruit from trees 

early in the season (culled fruit is destroyed). Farmers who participate in this 

project are eligible for subsidies of half the cost incurred. Japan Agriculture 

(JA), the national farmers’ cooperative, receives the funds from the national 

Government and passes it on to eligible producers. 

The Emergency Supply-Demand Adjustment Project. At harvest, if 

Japan’s total production exceeds an adequate market level, growers and 

grower cooperatives are asked to divert some product to the processing sector 

to avoid oversupply in the fresh market. Growers and grower cooperatives are 

eligible to receive 34 yen per kilogram (15 cents per pound) for fresh produce 

diverted to the processing market. 

Risk Management

About 86,000 of Japan’s fruit farms insured about 44,000 hectares in 2006 

(the last year of available data).6 One set of insurance policies applies to fruit 

and another to fruit trees or vines (after they have reached fruit-bearing age). 

Insurance for fruit can be comprehensive, covering yield decrease and/or 

quality deterioration caused by weather, fi re, plant disease, insects, and other 

pests. Alternatively, a farmer can insure only against damage from storm, 

hail, or frost. Farmers can choose to insure yields for the entire farm or on 

a plot-by-plot basis. Yield and quality are both insured if a farmer chooses 

to insure a standard income level. Tree/vine insurance covers plant death or 

heavy damage if trees wither, are washed away, disappear, or are buried. 

Insurance programs are available for the following fruits:7

• All citrus fruits;

• Apples, pears, peaches, cherries, Japanese apricots, and plums;

5 Notifi cations G/AG/N/JPN108, 124, 

129, and 132, accessible at http://

docsonline.wto.org/gen_search.

asp?searchmode=advanced. In these 

notifi cations, Japan exempted the 

payments from the Aggregate Measurement of Support because they constituted only 0.2 percent of the farm value of 

production, and thus fell under the de 

minimis rule of the WTO’s Agreement 

on Agriculture.

6 Statistical Yearbook of the Ministry 

of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 

2007-08, p. 670. The growing area for 

major fruits was about 225,000 hectares 

in 2006. Thus, about 20 percent was 

insured.

7 No insurance is provided for 

strawberries or other fruits not listed, 

unless they are grown in greenhouses. 

A separate insurance program covers 

greenhouse crops.
9

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

• Grapes and kiwis;

• Persimmons, chestnuts, loquats, and pineapples.

Japan’s agricultural insurance is centrally organized and was not changed 

by the 2005 Basic Policy. Agricultural Mutual Relief (AMR) associations 

are locally based and act as the primary insurance agents for farm activities. 

They collect premiums and dispense indemnities when claims are made. The 

AMR associations are grouped into prefectural AMR associations, which 

act as reinsurers for the local AMRs.8 MAFF acts as the reinsurer for the 

prefectural AMRs and pays half the insurance premium for fruit farmers as 

a subsidy. MAFF also pays part of the administrative costs for the local and 

prefectural AMRs (National Agricultural Insurance Association (NAIA), 

2005). In 2007, MAFF paid premiums of 2.2 billion yen ($19 million) for 

fruit farmers (NAIA, 2009). 

The premium rate is estimated every 3 years and primarily depends on the 

farm damage rate over the previous 20 years. The Government matches the 

amount paid by farmers. In 2004, the average participating fruit farmer paid 

33,000 yen for about 0.5 hectare of fruit area (i.e., about $305 for 1.19 acres). 

Indemnities for ordinary damage, such as setbacks for an individual farm, 

are paid jointly by the local and prefectural AMR associations. For extensive 

damage (e.g., damage over a wide area), most of the indemnity is paid by 

the national Government, with 20 percent of the indemnity coming from the 

local and prefectural AMR associations (NAIA, 2005). In 2006, indemnities of 4.858 billion yen ($42 million) were paid out for damaged fruit and 

trees. In recent years, aggregate premium revenue has been larger than 

indemnities.9 

In addition to the insurance program, the Japan Finance Corporation (a 

Government corporation) offers low-interest loans (current rate for the 

loans is 1.10-1.25 percent annually) to cover costs when farm operations are 

damaged by acts of nature, such as typhoons, heavy rainfall, drought, cold 

weather, or earthquake.10

School Lunch and Other Consumption Programs

MAFF promotes “local production for local consumption” (chisan chisho) 

to improve Japan’s food self-suffi ciency so that it is in line with the Basic 

Policy for Food, Agriculture and Rural Villages (March 2005). The school 

lunch program and farmers’ markets help promote local production and 

consumption.

The Basic Policy for Dietary Education Promotion (March 2006) states 

that school lunch programs should supply over 30 percent of their foodstuff 

with locally produced products by 2010 (as a national average). The policy 

promotes locally produced products for local consumption to build trust 

between growers and consumers and also to improve public interest in and 

understanding of fresh local foods. The defi nition of “local production for 

local consumption” is food produced and consumed within the same prefecture. In 2006, about 21 percent of school lunch consumption was provided by 

local production. A survey in 2004 found that 76.6 percent of schools used 

“local production for local consumption” food in their school lunch programs, 

8 Japan is divided into approximately 

50 prefectures, which are regional 

governments with signifi cant capacity 

to encourage and regulate agriculture 

within their boundaries.

9 Statistical Yearbook of the Ministry 

of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 

2007-08, p. 671.

10 Created in 2008, Japan Finance 

Corporation (http://www.jfc.go.jp/) 

consolidated four fi nance corporations: 

the Public Finance Corporation; the 

Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 

Finance Corporation; the Japan Finance 

Corporation for Small Business; and 

the Japan Bank for International Cooperation.
10

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

while only 14 percent of schools did not use any locally produced products. 

Food demand for Japan’s school lunch program is estimated at approximately 

500 billion yen ($5 billion) annually. There are no Government subsidies for 

fruit purchases by school lunch programs.11

Japan’s school lunch program uses relatively few imported fruits. Imported 

grapefruit, oranges, bananas, and kiwifruit are served for dessert in school 

lunches when domestic fruit supply is down. Dried-fruit products, such as 

California prunes and raisins, are occasionally served in school lunches. 

There are approximately 13,000 farmers’ markets throughout Japan. About 

3,000 markets are operated by agricultural cooperatives or local governments. Average annual sales per market are approximately 60 million yen 

($580,000) at markets operated by cooperatives or local governments. 

Farmers’ markets are often found in local Government parking lots or in a 

local shopping mall on weekends. Some large-scale farmers’ markets are 

permanently established roadside on major highways. Farmers pick seasonal 

fruits and vegetables early in the morning and display them at a nearby 

farmers’ market on the same day so that consumers can buy fresh-picked 

products at a reasonable price. 

Two major nonprofi t organizations are also active in consumption programs 

for fresh vegetables and fruits in Japan. The Five-a-Day Association promotes 

fruit and vegetable consumption through dietary education—“Let’s eat fi ve 

servings of vegetables (350 grams) and two servings of fruit (200 grams) 

every day.” The organization consists of over 130 companies, including 

supermarkets, trading companies, food processing companies, and growers.12 

Activities for Vegefru-seven are similar to those of the Five-a-Day program 

and promote fruit and vegetable consumption through dietary education and 

encouragement of a healthy lifestyle.13

11 In 1978-2000, mikan juice was 

subsidized by 2-5 yen/kg. The program 

ended in 2000.

12 http://www.5aday.net/

13 http://www.vf7.jp/
11

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

The import of fresh fruits and fruit products into Japan must overcome a 

number of obstacles—tariffs and sanitary standards—that ultimately affect 

cost and product availability. Fruit tariffs are set ad valorem (according to the 

product’s value) and may vary according to the source country, the season, 

and the form (fresh or processed) of the fruit. In addition to the tariffs, fruit 

imports must meet phytosanitary and sanitary standards. In many cases, 

these standards are greater barriers to imports than the tariffs.

Tariffs 

Japan’s tariffs on fruit range from 0 to 32 percent of the value (table 4). The 

highest tariff—32 percent—applies to oranges imported between December 

and May, when Japan’s main citrus crop is marketed.14 For all fruit—fresh, 

dried, frozen, or provisionally preserved15—the tariff for least-developed 

countries is zero.16 For many developing countries, the tariff is less than that 

for developed countries.17 Tariffs on imports from developed countries are 

generally more than zero, except for fresh dates, lemons, and limes, which 

face no tariff. 

Border Policies

14 Mori et al. provide more information about Japan’s orange tariff and the 

seasonal pattern of orange trade.

15 Provisionally preserved fruits are 

cooked, dried, or otherwise changed 

so that they can be easily shipped to 

processing facilities for inclusion in 

fi nished consumer food items.

16 Least-developed countries in Asia 

include Burma, Cambodia, Laos, the 

Maldives, Bangladesh, East Timor, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan, and Yemen. 

Least-developed countries outside Asia 

include Haiti, many countries in Africa, 

and certain island countries in Oceania.

17 Developing countries in Asia include 

China and all countries and territories 

in Asia except 1) those in the leastdeveloped group (see footnote 16) and 2) 

North Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Macao, Brunei, Bahrain, Kuwait, 

Qatar, Oman, Israel, and the United Arab 

Emirates. North Korea faces statutory 

tariffs that are generally higher than 

those faced by developed countries. 

Table 4

Japan’s tariffs on fruit imports by exporting countries’ development level

 Fresh 

Fruit Full year or in-season Out-of-season 

 Developed Developing Least-developed Developed Developing Least-developed 

 Percent

Bananas 25 20 0 20 10 0 

Dates 0 

Figs 6 3 0 

Pineapples 17 17 0 

Avocados 3 0 0 

Guavas and 

 mangoes 3 0 0 

Durians, rambutan, 

 passionfruit, etc. 5 2.5 0 

Pawpaws/papayas 2 0 0 

Oranges 32 32 0 16 16 0 

Mandarins/tangerines 17 17 0 

Lemons and limes 0 

Grapefruit 10 10 0 10 10 0 

Grapes 17 17 0 7.8 7.8 0 

Melons 6 6 0 

Apples 17 17 0 

Pears 4.8 4.8 0 

Apricots 6 6 0 

Cherries 8.5 8.5 0 

Peaches 6 6 0 

Plums 6 6 0 

Persimmons 6 6 0 

Strawberries 6 6 0 

Cranberries 6 3 0 

Other berries 6 3 0 

Kiwi 6.4 6.4 0 

—Continued
12

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Tariffs also vary depending on whether a fruit is imported in fresh, frozen, 

dried, or provisionally preserved form. Tariffs on frozen18 and provisionally preserved19 fruits are typically 12 percent for imports from developed 

countries, while tariffs on dried fruits are often 9 percent.20 Thus, in general, 

tariffs are highest on frozen and provisionally preserved fruit imports 

(presumably to protect Japanese fruit processors) and on fresh oranges, 

bananas, pineapples, mikan tangerines, and grapes—all fruits with some 

production in Japan.

Phytosanitary Rules 

Japan prohibits fruit imports from many parts of the world (Korea is the main 

exception) due to 17 pests that may be found in or on the product.21 Two—

codling moth and fi re blight—are signifi cant for temperate fruits. Some countries—notably the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Chile—have 

18 Tariffs on frozen sour cherries and 

frozen pineapples are higher at 13.8 

percent and 23.8 percent, respectively.

19 Tariffs on provisionally preserved bananas, oranges, mikan tangerines, and 

cherries are higher than 12 percent.

20 Only tariffs on dried oranges and 

tangerines are higher than 9 percent.

21 See MAFF, “List of the plants which 

are prohibited to be imported (Plant 

Protection Law Enforcement Regulations Annexed Table 2)” at http://www.

pps.go.jp/english/law/list2-(080911-).

html.

Table 4 (continued)

Japan’s tariffs on fruit imports by exporting countries’ development level

 Frozen Provisionally preserved Dried 

Fruit Developed Developing Least- Developed Developing Least- Developed Developing Least-

 developed developed developed

 Percent

Bananas1 12 12 0 25/20 25/20 0 3 0 0

Dates 12 12 0 12 12 0 0

Figs 12 12 0 12 12 0 6 3 0

Pineapples 23.8 23.8 0 12 12 0 7.2 7.2 0

Avocados2 12/7.2 12/3.6 0 12 10 0 3 0 0

Guavas and 

 mangoes2 12/7.2 12/3.6 0 12 10 0 3 0 0

Durians, rambutan, 

 passionfruit, etc.2 12/7.2 12/3.6 0 12 6 0 7.5 3.8 0

Pawpaws/

 papayas2 12/7.2 6/3.6 0 12 6 0 7.5 3.8 0

Oranges1 12 12 0 32/16 32/16 0 32/16 32/16 0

Mandarins/

 tangerines 12 12 0 17 17 0 17 17 0

Lemons/limes 12 12 0 0 0

Grapefruit 12 12 0 10 10 0 10 10 0

Grapes 12 12 0 12 12 0 1.2 0 0

Melons 12 12 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Apples 12 12 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Pears 7 7 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Apricots 12 12 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Cherries3 13.8 6.9 0 17 17 0 9 9 0

Peaches 7 7 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Plums 12 12 0 12 12 0 2.4 0 0

Persimmons 12 12 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Strawberries2 9.6/12 9.6/12 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Cranberries 12 12 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Other berries2 9.6/6 4.8/3 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Kiwi 12 12 0 12 12 0 9 9 0

Notes: This should not be regarded as an authoritative or complete listing. For more information, check the Customs Tariff Schedules of Japan.

1 Seasonal tariffs apply to provisionally preserved and/or dried fruit, indicated by two tariffs separated by a “/ ”.

2 Tariffs differ in one or more processed categories, depending on whether sugar has been added. The fi rst tariff refers to product with sugar 

added, and the second to product without added sugar. Tariffs are separated by “/ ”.

3 Tariffs in the frozen category are for sour cherries containing added sugar. The tariff on other cherries is 12 percent for developed and developing countries.

Source: Customs Tariff Schedules of Japan, 2008.
13

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

negotiated exceptions to trade bans on some fruits (table 5, for U.S. fruits).22 

Japan permits imports of apples, cherries, plums, and nectarines from the 

United States if “shipped directly, meeting standards of MAFF.”23, 24 U.S. 

apricots and peaches, among other fruits, are not allowed entry because of 

codling moth concerns, and U.S. pears are barred because of both codling 

moth and fi re blight. 

Japan’s Plant Protection Station is a MAFF agency that regulates plant 

disease issues both for domestic and imported items. It inspects shipments at 

Table 5

Quarantine conditions for various U.S. fruits

Fresh fruit Cultivars Year market opened Pest Required treatment 

Papaya1 Solo 1969 Mediterranean fruit fl y, Vapor heat treatment

 Oriental fruit fl y complex, 

 and melon fl y 

Mango1 Keitt 2000 

 Haden 

Cherry Bing 1978 Codling moth Methyl bromide fumigation

 Lambert 

 Van 1986 

 Rainier 1992 

 Garnet 1995 

 Tulare 1996 

 Brooks 

 Lapin 1999 

 Sweet Heart 

 Chelan 2001 

 All other cherry cultivars 2001 

Walnuts (in shell) Hartley 1986 Codling moth Methyl bromide fumigation

 Payne 

 Franquette 

Nectarine Summer Grand 1988 Codling moth Methyl bromide fumigation

 Spring Red 

 Fir Ebrite 

 Fantasia 

 May Grand 

 Red Diamond 

 May Fine 1993 

 May Glo 

 May Diamond 

 Royal Giant 1995 

 All other nectarines 2000 

European plum D’agen 2001 Codling moth Methyl bromide fumigation

 Tulare Giant 2005 

 Moyer 

 All other European plums 

Apple2 Red Delicious 1994 Codling moth Cold treatment

 Golden Delicious Fire blight Methyl bromide fumigation

 Fuji 1999 

 Braeburn 

 Granny Smith 

 Gala 

 Jona Gold 

 All other apples 2001 

1 Hawaiian Islands only. 

2 Washington, Oregon, and California only.

Source: Japan Fresh Produce Import and Safety Association.

22 Calvin and Krissoff (2005) provide 

an overview, p. 5.

23 “These standards include the terms 

and conditions for the type and variety 

of plants, its production area, methods 

of sterilization, means of transportation, 

etc.” See http://www.pps.go.jp/english/

jobs/index.html.

24 Calvin and Krissoff review the history of Japan’s phytosanitary controls 

on cherry imports (p. 4).
14

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Japanese ports and can accept or reject them. It also inspects plant protection 

systems in exporting countries for their treatments of certain pests. 

Nearly 60 percent of U.S. grapefruit exports to Japan were fumigated at the 

port of entry in 2008 (table 6), as were signifi cant shares of oro blanco, raspberry, and lemons. Rejections of fruit were much less common. 

The United States’ ability to export apples, cherries, plums, and nectarines 

has involved protracted negotiations with Japan. From 1994 to 2005, apples 

grown for Japanese markets could only come from certain U.S. growing 

areas and from specifi c parts of orchards separated by 10-meter buffers from 

trees bearing apples not designated for Japanese markets. Orchard inspections by MAFF offi cials at the small fruit stage, chlorine dips, fumigation, 

and post-harvest inspection all added to the cost of producing such apples. 

Negotiations with the United States and other trading partners, followed by a 

WTO case which Japan lost, led to the adoption of a less restrictive, but still 

onerous, system in August 2005 that includes: 

• 55 days of cold treatment;

• Methyl-bromide fumigation; and

• Intensive inspections by MAFF offi cers.25

In 2009, Japan revised its phytosanitary restrictions on U.S. cherries to allow 

imports without methyl-bromide fumigation if three conditions are met: 

 1. Imported crop must come from fi elds that have had few cases of codling 

moths; 

 2. Inspections must take place before the crops are exported from the 

United States and then again when they arrive in Japan, and; 

Table 6

Fresh fruit plant quarantine inspection results: Imports from the United States, 2008

 Inspected Fumigated at entry Rejected Percent Percent

Fruit (kg) to Japan (kg) (kg) fumigated1 rejected2

Lemons 36,734,426 2,912,390 34 7.9 0.00

Grapefruit 122,924,745 78,498,271 22,450 63.9 0.02

Oranges 71,801,074 1,140,082 4 1.6 0.00

Minneolas 7,460,168 141,303 0 1.9 0.00

Oro blancos 1,412,145 108,814 0 7.7 0.00

Avocados 138,194 0 0 0.0 0.00

Mangos 287,244 0 1 0.0 0.00

Papaya 926,530 0 21 0.0 0.00

Kiwifruit 84,651 0 0 0.0 0.00

Cherry 8,472,838 0 11,364 0.0 0.13

Raspberry 427,446 23,678 0 5.5 0.00

Table grapes 1,923,643 101,483 282 5.3 0.01

Pomegranates 274,174 10,866 0 4.0 0.00

1 Fumigated volume as percent of the total volume inspected. Products were fumigated at the port of entry, then imported into Japan. 

2 Rejected volume as percent of the total volume inspected. Products were denied entry into Japan. 

Notes: Using lemons as an example, 36,734,426 kilograms of U.S. lemons were inspected and 2,912,390 kilograms (7.9 percent of the total 

imports) were ordered to be fumigated at the port of entry in 2008; 34 kg were rejected for entry into Japan.

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan (MAFF), 2009. Plant Quarantine Statistics (compiled by FAS/Tokyo). 

25 Calvin and Krissoff (2005) provide 

more detail and discussion of the effects of the new protocol (pp. 11-12).
15

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

 3. Japanese quarantine offi cials must periodically carry out onsite inspections of U.S. orchards.26 

As a result of these new phytosanitary restrictions, U.S. exporters can send 

cherries by ship instead of by air. Without fumigation, the cherries have a 

longer shelf life, allowing for ocean shipment that is less expensive than air 

freight.27 Similar changes were made for plums and nectarines, but trade has 

yet to occur.

26 FAS/Tokyo, Daily Agricultural 

Highlights, March 31 and July 2, 2009; 

and California Cherry Advisory Board, 

2009 Export Manual.

27 Associated Press, Shannon Dininny, 

“New inspection rules help Western 

cherry exporters,” FAS/Tokyo Daily 

Agricultural Highlights, July 9, 2009.
16

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Japan’s Supply-Demand Stabilization Program aims to keep prices stable and 

at a relatively high level. Because phytosanitary and tariff barriers often keep 

imports out, controlling domestic supplies may help maintain market prices. 

Consumers may pay a higher price in most years as a result of this policy, 

however, and may consume less fruit than if supply were unfettered and 

prices were lower. Government efforts to restructure fruit farming into larger, 

more effi cient units could lead to lower-cost production, and, potentially, to 

lower market prices. Structural change, however, has been modest to date. 

Japan’s fruit prices are often higher than those of neighboring countries 

and those in the United States. Since the quality of fruits marketed in Japan 

is very high, the higher prices may be a quality premium. Branding fresh 

fruits is reportedly more prevalent in Japan than in the United States, and 

may allow some premiums to be added to market prices.28 Border measures 

imposed by Japan’s Government, however, are another price factor. Otherwise, high-quality fruits could be imported relatively soon after picking from 

countries where prices are much lower. Japan’s tariffs on oranges and other 

fruits may impede some trade, but tariffs on many fruits are relatively low.29

Phytosanitary rules also affect fruit trade by preventing some imports, raising 

the cost of others, and/or degrading the fruit. 

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 

estimated that consumers paid 63 billion yen ($609 million) more for grapes, 

49.74 billion yen ($481 million) more for pears, 20.2 billion yen ($195 

million) more for apples, and 10 billion yen ($93 million) more for strawberries in 2008 than if they had purchased them at an international reference 

price.30 

At the farmgate, a comparison of Japanese producer prices and U.S. free-onboard (fob) shipping-point prices for seven fruits shows that Japan’s farmers 

receive prices 1.5 to 7.5 times higher than those realized by U.S. farmers (fi g. 

4). The highest price ratios in 2004-07 were for watermelons, peaches, strawberries, and pears. The lowest price ratios were for grapes. At the retail level, 

price ratios in 2004-08 for six comparable fruits ranged from 1.2 to almost 

3 times higher in Japan than in the United States (fi g. 5). Such comparisons, 

whether at the farmgate or retail, cannot account for quality differences, 

which can be considerable.

Lemons, which enter Japan without tariff, offer a useful point of reference. 

In 2006, lemon prices in Tokyo ranged from a low of 1.34 times the average 

price in U.S. urban areas to a high of 1.68 times the U.S. price. Because neither 

country imposes signifi cant border tariffs, comparing lemon prices may 

demonstrate how market conditions, rather than Government policies, affect 

fruit prices.31 In this comparison, Tokyo’s retail prices appear to be roughly 50 

percent higher than U.S. urban prices. Bananas are also imported by both countries. Japan imposes tariffs of 10 or 20 percent (depending on the season) on 

banana imports from principal exporting countries,32 and Tokyo’s retail prices 

are 1.75-2 times higher than U.S. urban prices. This price difference does not 

refl ect higher production prices.33 Rather, the price refl ects the tariff as well as 

marketing and transport charges unique to Japan.34 

Policy Implications

28 Based on a review by William Gorman and Hiroshi Mori, November 14, 

2009.

29 Mori et al. (2009) estimated an ownprice elasticity of -1.3 for oranges purchased for home use in Japan. Because 

the tariff raises the price of oranges in 

Japan, price-sensitive consumers may 

purchase fewer oranges because of the 

tariff.

30 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 

Producer and Consumer Support 

Estimates, OECD Database 1986-2008, 

accessed 2/3/10.

31 Transportation charges to the importing country may also differ.

32 Japan’s tariffs are designed to support its small banana production on 

southern islands, such as Okinawa.

33 Japan imports mostly from the 

Philippines, while the United States 

is supplied principally by Central and 

South America. Free-on-board export 

unit values in the exporting countries 

are similar, regardless of whether the 

trade fl ow is to Japan or to the United 

States.

34 MAFF conducted a survey of retail 

prices in November 2006, fi nding that 

retail prices were lower in New York 

City for bananas (87 percent of those in 

Tokyo); and that grapefruits and apples 

were more expensive in New York 

City than in Tokyo (127 percent and 

110 percent, respectively). Statistical 

Yearbook of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 2007-08, 

p. 685. Prices in New York City tend to 

be higher than in the rest of the United 

States.
17

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Figure 4

Japan-U.S. producer fruit price ratio

Ratio of Japan’s farm price to U.S. shipping-point price

Sources: ERS calculations based on Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan (MAFF) monthly statistics and data 

from Lucier (2008) and Perez and Pollack (2008).

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Watermelon

Peaches

Strawberries

Apples

Grapes

Pears Kiwifruit

 2004 2005 2006 2007

Figure 5

Japan-U.S. retail fruit price ratio

Ratio of Japan’s price to U.S. price

Sources: ERS calculations based on Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan (MAFF) monthly statistics and data 

from Perez and Pollack (2008).

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Bananas

Strawberries

Apples

Grapefruit

Lemons Oranges

 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
18

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

The highest price ratio in the available set of comparable retail prices is for 

strawberries. Tokyo’s retail strawberry prices are 2.65-2.95 times higher for 

strawberries than in the United States. Producer prices in Japan are 3.5-4.5 

times higher than in the United States. Strawberries are a relatively perishable crop, which likely raises transport costs. Tariffs on fresh strawberries 

are relatively low (6 percent for strawberries from the United States and all 

countries geographically close to Japan), but phytosanitary rules may be an 

obstacle—Japan reports no imports from China, a large, nearby producing 

country.35 

Farmers in exporting countries could increase exports if Japan’s fruit market 

were more accessible. Table 2 shows a generally inverse relationship between 

fruit production and imports: Imports are relatively minor for the fruits Japan 

produces the most of, and domestic production is minor for fruits which Japan 

imports the most. However, varietal differences, seasonal differences, and 

price factors can lead to trade even when a country produces a great volume 

of a fruit. For example, Japan imports signifi cant amounts of tangerines, 

melons, grapes, and strawberries, despite large domestic production. Trade is 

negligible or nonexistent for a number of fruits—pears, persimmons, peaches, 

apricots, and plums—with tariffs of 6 percent or less (see table 2). Trade in 

these markets is likely discouraged by phytosanitary regulations. 

In general, even though the relatively high tariffs on oranges, apples, grapes, 

and pineapples hinder imports of these fruits, perhaps the greatest opportunity to improve imports in Japan could come by addressing phytosanitary 

issues. Fumigation, for example, affects fruit quality. Alternative phytosanitary rules would allow imports to be priced lower, and also increase imports 

of the fruit cultivars grown in the rest of the world but currently unavailable 

in Japan.

35 Offi cial Japanese trade data, reported 

by the World Trade Atlas.
19

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Japan’s trade policies were created to support fruit production, and generous 

subsidies help farmers improve their orchards. The Government protects 

farmers against natural hazards (damage and disease) with insurance 

subsidies. Protection against market risk (chiefl y lower prices) is achieved 

by culling fruit or through subsidies to farmers who send some fruit to 

processing rather than to fresh markets. Subsidies also help farmers exit the 

sector, encouraging farm consolidation. Despite this fi nancial support, structural change has been slow, and the fruit farm sector has gradually shrunk 

while the average age of fruit farmers has risen. 

Consumers in Japan pay higher fruit prices because of internal supplymanagement policies, tariffs, and phytosanitary rules applied to imports. 

To some extent, consumers may also pay higher prices because of real or 

perceived quality differences, branding efforts, or higher marketing costs. 

Given lower prices, consumers could save money but would also be likely to 

purchase more fruit.36 Consumers (taxpayers) also pay as their tax dollars 

fund supply-management, hazard insurance, orchard improvement, and infrastructural support subsidies provided to fruit farmers. 

At the Japanese border, relatively high tariffs apply to some fruit imports. 

Phytosanitary regulations, however, constitute the main impediment to 

imports, especially regulations that target codling moths and fi re blight. Of 

the 19 major fruits produced in Japan, 8 fruit crops see no import activity, 

likely as a result of phytosanitary barriers. U.S. fruit producers, who currently 

export almost $500 million in fruit products to Japan, would benefi t if Japan 

reduced its tariffs and if they could consistently meet Japan’s phytosanitary standards, either by improving U.S. management and technology or by 

revising Japan’s strict standards. Japan’s consumers would also benefi t from 

lower prices stemming from increased import supply.

Conclusions

36 Calvin and Krissoff (2005) estimate 

consumer impacts of Japan’s phytosanitary controls on apples.
20

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

California Cherry Advisory Board. 2009 Export Manual.

Calvin, Linda, and Barry Krissoff. Resolution of the U.S.-Japan Apple 

Dispute; New Opportunities for Trade, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Economic Research Service, Outlook Report FTS-318-01, October 2005, 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/FTS/Oct05/fts31801/. 

Fukuda, Hisao, John Dyck, and Jim Stout. Rice Sector Policies in Japan, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Outlook Report 

RCS 0303-01, March 2003, http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/rcs/

mar03/rcs030301/. 

Japan Fresh Produce Import and Safety Association. Yearbook, 2008.

Japan Tariff Association. Customs Tariff Schedules of Japan, 2008.

Lucier, Gary. Vegetables and Melons Situation and Outlook Yearbook,

VGS-2008, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research 

Service, May 2008, http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/VGS/index.

htm#yearbook.

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (MAFF) [Japan]. Monthly 

Statistics of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, various issues.

———. Statistical Yearbook of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries,

2007-2008.

———. “New Fruit Measures—Farm Management Supports for Fruit 

Production,” http://www:maff.go.jp/work/newfruits.pdf.

———. “The Basic Policy for the Fruit Industry Promotion,” http://www.

maff.go.jp/www/press/cont2/20050330press_8b.pdf. 

———. “Quick Understanding! New Fruit Industry Measures (Fruit Industry 

Management Support / Supply-Demand Stabilization Measures),” http://

www.maff.go.jp/j/seisan/engei/fruits/index.html.

———. “The Expansion of the Use of Locally Produced Agricultural Products to School Lunch Programs,” http://www.maff.go.jp/j/seisan/gijutu/

tisan_tisyo/pdf/kyushoku.pdf.

———. “The Promotion of the Local Production for Local Consumption at 

Farm Stands,” http://www.maff.go.jp/chisanchisyo/pdf/pamph.pdf.

———. interviews by Kenzo Ito with MAFF staff via phone conference.

Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication [Japan], Statistics Bureau. 

Family Income and Expenditure Survey, http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/

ListE.do?lid=000001055113.

Mori, Hiroshi, John Dyck, Susan Pollack, and Kimiko Ishibashi. The Japanese Market for Oranges, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic 

References
21

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Research Service, FTS-330-01, March 2008, http://www.ers.usda.gov/

Publications/FTS/2008/03Mar/FTS33001/FTS33001.pdf.

Mori, Hiroshi, Dennis Clason, Kimiko Ishibashi, William D. Gorman, and 

John Dyck. Declining Orange Consumption in Japan: Generational 

Changes, Or Something Else? ERR-71, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Economic Research Service, February 2009, http://www.ers.usda.gov/

Publications/ERR71/

National Agricultural Insurance Association. The Outline of Japan’s Agricultural Insurance Scheme, printed brief, Japan, 2005.

National Agricultural Insurance Association. The Outline of Japan’s Agricultural Insurance Scheme, printed brief, Japan, 2009.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 

Producer and Consumer Support Estimates, OECD Database 1986-2008, 2010, http://www.oecd.org/document/59/0,334

3,en_2649_33797_39551355_1_1_1_37401,00.html

Perez, Agnes, and Susan Pollack. Fruit and Tree Nuts Yearbook, FTS-2008, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, October 

2008, http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/FTS/index.htm#yearbook.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, Tokyo. Daily 

Agricultural Highlights, various issues.
22

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

The old fruit policies focused on adjusting supply-demand to stabilize market 

prices and on stabilizing farm management through farm income support. 

These old measures were in effect from 2001 to April 2007, when they were 

replaced by the new fruit import and production policies. 

Supply-Demand Adjustment Project

This project was effective from April 2001 to March 2007 and applied to 

mikan tangerines and apples. Each year, MAFF set production and shipment levels by looking at supply and demand situations and then prompted 

local JA’s (agricultural growers’ cooperatives) to adjust their production plans 

(often through culling) to meet goals for the season (app. table 1). 

Management Stabilization Project

If market prices fell below a predetermined standard price, growers participating in the Supply-Demand Adjustment Project were eligible for price 

subsidies. This price subsidy program ended in March 2007 and enabled 

growers to receive a direct payment equal to approximately 80 percent of the 

difference between the actual market price and the predetermined standard 

price for subsidies, per unit of output. Fifty percent of the fund that provided 

the subsidies was contributed by MAFF and the rest by local governments 

and participating member growers.1 The standard price for subsidies was 

determined by an average market price for the last 6 years adjusted with each 

year’s variation coeffi cient. The standard price was established for each 

prefecture for each season. For the fi rst 4 years of the project (2001-04), 

the total amount of subsidies paid out was 18.8 billion yen ($160 million, at 

the 2008 yen/dollar exchange rate) to unshu mikan growers and 7.2 billion 

yen ($61 million) to apple growers (app. table 2). Subsidy amounts for each 

prefecture varied by fruit crop based on average market prices and the standard price for subsidies in 2005 (app. table 3).

Rice Diversion Payments

Under the rice diversion program (ended in 2007), farmers were encouraged 

to plant fruit orchards in former rice paddies, addressing two issues: 

1. Reducing rice production, which exceeded demand; and, 

2. Increasing fruit production, which the Government favored. 

In 2001, for example, the annual rice diversion payment was as high as 

150,000 yen/hectare ($1,240 U.S. dollars).2

Appendix: Previous Fruit Policies

1 Nineteen prefectures participated 

annually in the case of unshu mikan 

tangerines and six in the case of apples.

2 Fukuda, Dyck, and Stout, pp. 7-8. 
23

Fruit Policies in Japan / FTS-341-01

Economic Research Service/USDA

Appendix table 1 

Supply-demand target and actual levels, 2004-2005

Levels Mikan tangerines Apples

 Production Shipment Production Shipment

2004 Metric tons

Actual levels (a) 1,060,000 937,000 754,000 667,000 

Target levels (b) 1,110,000 985,000 870,000 780,000 

Ratio (a/b) 96% 95% 87% 86%

2005 

Actual levels (a) 1,130,000 1,010,000 819,000 724,000 

Target levels (b) 1,110,000 985,000 870,000 780,000 

Ratio (a/b) 102% 102% 94% 93%

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Appendix table 2 

Management stabilization subsidies

Year Mikan tangerines Apples Total

 Billion yen

2001 11.8 3.3 15.1 

2002 3.4 3.9 7.3 

2003 3.6 0 3.6 

2004 0.3 0 0.3 

Sum 18.8 7.2 26.0 

Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

Appendix table 3 

Mikan tangerines: Major prefectures

Prefecture Average price Standard price Subsidy Average 

 (March 2006) for subsidy amount paid per-farm

 subsidy paid

Yen/kg Yen/kg Billion yen Thousand yen

Shizuoka 173 185 0.8 141

Wakayama 149 160 0.8 126

Hiroshima 110 145 0.8 191

Ehime 155 170 0.5 69

Fukuoka 130 140 0.1 106

Saga 127 140 0.4 122

Nagasaki 147 150 0.1 26

Kumamoto 124 150 1.3 517

Notes: Seventeen prefectures participated in the program and received subsidies. Total subsidies 

paid were 5.1 billion yen in 2005. The average exchange rate was 110.2 yen per U.S. dollar in 

2005. 

Source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.