Japan’s new model of capitalism in an uncertain world
Author: Shujiro Urata, Waseda University
The year 2021 began with hope that the successful development of a new vaccine would relieve the world from the COVID-19 pandemic. But while vaccines were rapidly deployed in Europe and the United States, the Japanese government’s slow approval process delayed its rollout.
Under former prime minister Yoshihide Suga, the vaccine rollout was eventually accelerated after administrative and logistical hiccups were resolved, contributing to a decline in the number of infections. A state of emergency continued until 30 September as Suga needed to keep cases low to host the Olympics and to increase his chances of being re-elected as leader of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) in the late-September election.
Suga hosted the Olympics in the face of general public opposition. The number of infections skyrocketed during the event, resulting in a rapid decline in Suga’s approval rating and forcing him to cede his leadership of the LDP. Fumio Kishida replaced Suga as prime minister and won the general election in October owing to the support of key conservative party members, weak opposition parties and a sharp decline in COVID-19 cases.
Japan’s economic performance was stagnant throughout 2021. According to IMF projections, Japan registered a 2.4 per cent GDP growth rate for the year — an improvement from -4.6 per cent in 2020 — mainly due to inactive consumption from continued uncertainty surrounding COVID-19. A shortage of semiconductors resulting from the pandemic disrupted production of automobiles and electronics among other products, causing a slowdown in economic activity.
The economic consequences of COVID-19 are characterised by a K-shaped pattern reflecting two divergent trends — upward and downward. An increase in demand was found in the technology sector, especially for products such as office machines, while a decrease in demand was found mainly in service sectors such as tourism. Another K-shape consequence was observed for the rich and the poor. The wealthy saw the value of their financial assets rise, while the poor suffered from declining wages and unemployment, resulting in widening inequality.
Looking forward to 2022, Kishida must achieve economic recovery and sustainable growth in an increasingly uncertain environment caused by the new Omicron variant of the virus, climate change and US–China rivalry, among other factors. In response to COVID-19, Kishida is ready to take necessary measures — including accelerating the rollout of vaccine booster shots, speeding up the approval of oral treatments and providing government support for people and companies negatively impacted by the pandemic.
Kishida has advocated a ‘new model of capitalism’ to promote economic growth and equitable distribution simultaneously. The model’s two components are to be achieved by generating a virtuous cycle of economic growth and increasing wages through the collaboration of public and private sectors.
The model’s first component for economic growth has four sub-components, innovation, digital economy, climate change and economic security. The government is to play an active role in each of these. For innovation, the government will support start-up companies and develop human resources in science and technologies. For digital economy, it will build digital infrastructure to provide various services throughout the country. For climate change, it will undertake investment and regulatory reform in the clean energy sector to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.
Kishida is particularly keen on economic security. He realises the increasing risks of supply issues for strategically important materials and technologies due to heightened geopolitical tensions and possible natural and health disasters, including new infectious diseases. Following similar actions taken by the United States and other major countries, Kishida created the position of minister in charge of economic security in his new cabinet. He is also expected to pass the ‘Act for Promoting Economic Security’, which contains provisions to strengthen supply chains and build critical infrastructure.
A major element of the model’s second component, which focusses on achieving equitable distribution, is increasing wages. For this reason, fiscal measures including tax breaks to companies, increasing wages and direct subsidies to selected groups of workers such as nurses are being considered. The impacts of these measures are likely to be small. A variety of government support for child-rearing — such as expanding capacity for nurseries and childcare centres and the provision of a housing allowance to families with children — are also included. Yet more drastic reform in the labour market must be undertaken to increase overall wages.
The possible economic consequences of Kishida’s new form of capitalism demand closer scrutinisation. This is particularly the case for economic security, as national security is often considered without factoring in economic consequences or costs. Kishida’s new model of capitalism will require large government expenditure, increasing Japan’s already substantial fiscal debt. Kishida needs to provide a blueprint for achieving fiscal sustainability, otherwise citizens will fail to increase spending, against his expectations.
Full implementation of Kishida’s policy hinges on many variables, including an LDP victory in the upper house election in July 2022. To win, Kishida must handle the pandemic successfully. While the IMF projects 3.2 per cent growth for the Japanese economy in 2022, this growth rate may be significantly lower if COVID-19 is not controlled. Only time will tell the success of Japan’s new capitalism.
Shujiro Urata is Professor Emeritus at Waseda University.
This article is part of an EAF special feature series on 2021 in review and the year ahead.
Kishida’s new capitalism raises more questions than it answers
Author: Aurelia George Mulgan, UNSW Canberra
Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s new economic program is gradually taking shape via a series of major policy announcements and record-breaking government spending initiatives. These include ‘an economic stimulus package that dwarfs anything announced by his predecessors’, the biggest supplementary budget in history amounting to 36 trillion yen (US$314 billion) for fiscal year 2021, a national budget plan allocating 107 trillion yen (US$933 billion) for fiscal year 2022 and a fiscal year 2022 tax reform plan.
The stated mission of the government is to deliver economic measures that will ‘overcome COVID-19 and pioneer a new era’ including ‘the realization of a new form of capitalism, the linchpin for reviving the Japanese economy’. For Kishida, ‘new capitalism’ represents a necessary economic model upgrade where ‘rather than leaving everything to markets and competition … public and private sector entities together play their roles’.
Promoted through public–private partnership, this ‘new form of capitalism’ is intended to lead to faster economic growth and higher wages. Kishida’s ‘new capitalism’ rejects neoliberalism predicated on market dominance, which he holds responsible for promoting greater inequality and poverty, as well as for exacerbating climate change.
Kishida wants to distribute the fruits of economic growth more directly to lower and middle-income groups through redistributive policies rather than rely on the ‘trickle-down’ economics that characterised the Abe administration. ‘New capitalism’ embodies an implicit rejection of Abenomics in terms of both national economic strategy and policy sloganeering. Politically, this is a deliberate challenge to Abe’s legacy and appears to be a popular move with majority support among the Japanese public. Whether this rejection extends beyond rhetoric is questionable, however, particularly in areas such as massive fiscal stimulus, quantitative easing and policies that deliver wage increases.
Questions arise about how the range of spending and incentive programs will create a ‘new form of capitalism’. The connection between new capitalism, the targets for government assistance, and other proactive measures, needs careful clarification. Promoting new industries is not necessarily synonymous with establishing a new form of capitalism. Although Kishida has made clear his dedication to implementing his policy agenda, ‘new capitalism’ is fast turning into a label of convenience for a range of disparate government measures and spending initiatives.
In Kishida’s New Year’s speech, he nominated specific elements — digitalisation, climate change, economic security, innovation, and science and technology — as ‘engines of growth’, reiterating the importance of tackling disparities, bringing about redistribution through wage increases initiated by companies, and greater investment in people. But the respective roles of these factors in establishing a ‘new form of capitalism’ still needs elaboration. Whether private corporations will fall into line with Kishida’s wishes also remains an open question.
Kishida’s economic program has been heavy on rhetoric but light on reform. The overarching goals set for his administration incorporate variants of the phrase ‘growth and distribution’, including ‘creating a virtuous cycle of economic growth and wealth distribution’.
In practice, Kishida quickly reversed the order of his ‘virtuous cycle of growth and distribution’ to ‘distribution to spur growth.’ Distribution has clearly become the top priority — sourced primarily from government coffers in the form of a ‘cash splash’ and baramaki (government handouts) — rather than the fruits of economic growth or reform.
Implementing Kishida’s ‘new capitalism’ has thus entailed all gain and no pain at the public’s expense. It has become a convenient label for a traditional LDP-style big spending policy — albeit, for spending targets that focus on large social and economic groupings, and on strategically and socially important industries, rather than on traditional LDP special interests.
During his campaign for the LDP presidency, Kishida very quickly backed off the main policy instrument that would have provided a source of cash to be redistributed to employees and to lower and middle-income groups — taxing investment income by raising the capital gains tax, thus making corporate profits a source of economic growth.
Nor is Kishida seeking funds from sources such as corporate tax hikes which, if combined with increased financial income taxes, would have amounted to substantial tax reform. He has also failed to implement the introduction of a carbon tax levied in proportion to companies’ greenhouse gas emissions in line with new capitalism’s major goal of transitioning Japan to a carbon-free society.
These policy backdowns have disappointed expectations given that economic reform was touted as the most urgent item on Prime Minister Kishida’s policy schedule. Yet being in pre-election mode means that Kishida is under pressure to come up with policies that deliver economic and financial benefits quickly and directly to Japanese voters. Economic reform has, so far, taken a back seat to Kishida’s spending, a commitment he can justify in terms of invigorating the Japanese economy suffering from COVID-19 fallout.
In pushing Japan’s fiscal debt beyond an unprecedented one quadrillion yen (US$10.5 trillion) in outstanding government bonds, Kishida has prioritised the political rationale for ‘big spending’ — promoting economic measures that maximise the benefits to as many voters as possible, ensuring the consolidation of his leadership and the LDP’s success in the July general election.
The ‘big spend’ is coming first because of the electoral timetable and the convenient rationale that the COVID-19 economy needs boosting. But if Kishida were serious about the necessary economic reforms to create his ‘virtuous cycle of growth and redistribution’, he would implement policies with far greater potential to boost economic growth such as adopting measures to raise real wages and productivity, and completing the structural reforms promised but not delivered by Abenomics.
Clearly Kishida’s ‘new capitalism’ remains a work in progress. Perhaps realising the ideals and objectives of his newly announced ‘grand design’ of ‘new capitalism’, and implementing his summer action plan for ‘new capitalism’, will provide the answers.
Aurelia George Mulgan is Professor at the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, the University of New South Wales, Canberra.
No comments:
Post a Comment