家族自営漁業の震災被害と復旧政策の性格について(大会報告・共通論題:東日本大震災・原発事故からの地域経済社会の再建をめぐって)

DOI Web Site

書誌事項

タイトル別名
  • "Welfare to Work": Post-tsunami Reconstruction Policies for Coastal Fisheries(PAPERS READ AT THE AUTUMN CONFERENCE SYMPOSIUM, 2011, Academic Tasks for the Reconstruction of Local Economies and Societies after the Tohoku-Pacific Ocean Earthquake and the Fukushima Nuclear Accident)
  • 家族自営漁業の震災被害と復旧政策の性格について
  • カゾク ジエイ ギョギョウ ノ シンサイ ヒガイ ト フッキュウ セイサク ノ セイカク ニ ツイテ

この論文をさがす

抄録

The homes and workplaces of coastal fishermen are necessarily located very near the coastline and were accordingly hit especially hard by the March, 2011 Tohoku earthquake and resultant tsunami. Given the scale of the damage and fatalities, it was immediately clear that coastal fishermen in Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima Prefectures would be unable to resume their fishery activities without special public aid. Governmental relief and recovery plans being slow to materialize, however, many fishermen lost hope and the will to rebuild. This in turn posed the threat that local economies, based as they had been on the fisheries industry, would go into decline. Young people would have to leave the area, and the middle-aged and the elderly, who cannot readily enter new fields of work, would remain, living on welfare benefits. It was under these circumstances that the government adopted a relief plan that was much more powerful and effective than those following previous disasters had been. Especially important was the change in the policy principle that fishermen's private assets should not be subsidized. Concretely, the government approved a plan to offer subsidies that would enable individual fishermen to replace their boats and related equipment at one-ninth or one-sixth the regular price. Encouraged by these new policies, most coastal fishermen once again became motivated to rebuild. Many people have criticized the government's relief plan, but it is a reasonable approach because it encourages coastal fishermen to work actively for the reconstruction of their businesses. The government naturally did not adopt these policies out of generosity or kindness. Rather, it agreed to subsidies of this kind because it feared that the majority of those remaining in the coastal region, where there were no good employment alternatives to the fisheries industry, would become permanently dependent on welfare benefits. The government's policy can therefore be understood as an example of welfare state reorganization, or in other words, as a policy of encouraging a shift "from welfare to work."

収録刊行物

  • 歴史と経済

    歴史と経済 54 (3), 24-33, 2012

    政治経済学・経済史学会

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ