No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Perspective on Recent Japanese Economic Growth
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 February 2011
Extract
That Japanese economic growth since the war has been spectacular is well known. Real net national income per head at the beginning of the 1960's was roughly twice that of the middle thirties, and four times the postwar low of 1946. In all sorts of ways—industrial structure, levels of regular employment, composition and level of consumption—Japan has made a decisive break from the economy of the 1930's. While the achievement is obvious, it is more difficult to know how to assess the performance, even when attention is directed solely toward the overall growth of the economy as measured by total output. What standards or measures can be applied to permit the answering of such questions as whether recent Japanese growth has been “fast” or “satisfactory”? There is a variety of ways in which this problem could be approached. One would be to compare Japanese growth with that of other countries; another would be to consider the potentialities of growth since the war and whether they have been used to maximum advantage. Here the question will be considered from an historical point of view: How does recent growth measure up against past performance of the economy?
- Type
- Note
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Economic History Association 1966
References
1 Ohkawa, K., The Growth Rate of the Japanese Economy Since 1878 (Tokyo: Kinokuniya 1957), p. 17Google Scholar. The terminal years are the quinquennial averages of the years 1878–82 and 1938–42. The actual growth rate is 4.2 per cent per annum.
2 Ohkawa, and Rosovsky, , “Recent Japanese Growth in Historical Perspective,” American Economic Review, LIII (May 1963), Part 1, 578–88Google Scholar.
3 Ibid., p. 578, n. 1.
4 Ibid., p. 579.
5 Ohkawa, Growth Rate. The revision leads to some wide differences in individual years.
6 Ibid., pp. 132–34.
7 Ohkawa, K. and Rosovsky, H., “The Role of Agriculture in Modem Japanese Economic Development,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. IX (1960–61)Google Scholar, passim.
8 Annual Statistics of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, 1868–1953 (Tokyo: Government Printing Office, 1955), p. 24. Rice dominated Japanese agricultural production; in this period it made up some 50 per cent of the value of output in primary industry.
9 Penrose's index of food production declines 19 per cent; see Penrose, E. F., Food Supply and Raw Materials in Japan (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1930), p. 23Google Scholar. Ohkawa (Growth Rate, p. 72) estimates a fall in total primary production of 23 per cent.
10 Annual Statistics, p. 24.
11 Penrose (p. 29) estimates a rise in food production of 20 per cent, and Ohkawa's estimate for primary industry (Growth Rate, p. 72) is the same.
12 Ohkawa, Growth Rate, p. 248.
13 Ibid., p. 101.
14 Annual Statistics, p. 24.
15 Penrose (p. 53) estimates a rise in agricultural output of 10 per cent, and Ohkawa (Growth Rate, p. 73) of 15 per cent for primary industry.
16 Rice production figures from Japan Statistical Year Book, 1955–6 (Tokyo: Office of the Prime Minister, Bureau of Statistics, 1956), p. 88Google Scholar.
17 Ohkawa, Growth Rate, p. 248.
18 American Economic Review, LIII, Part I, 578–79, and 582.
19 Ibid., p. 578, n. 1.
20 From the table in the text. It is a simple average; the more usual compound average would be 10.8 per cent per annum.
21 Japan Statistical Year Book, 1964, p. 413. Refers to net national income.
22 Ibid.
23 Ohkawa, Growth Rate, p. 17. Terminal years refer to the quinquennial averages of the years 1878–82 and 1938–42. Agriculture here includes forestry and fishing.
24 Ibid., p. 248.
25 Japan Statistical Year Book, 1964, p. 412.