<b>住民自治を育む過疎地域活性化運動の10年</b>:鳥取県智頭町「日本・ゼロ分のイチ村おこし運動」  [in Japanese] <b>Ten-year revitalization movement for the enhancement of self-governance by residents in a depopulated rural community</b>:Action research in Chizu, Tottori prefecture, Japan  [in Japanese]

Access this Article

Author(s)

Abstract

本研究は、ある過疎地域で集落の自治力を高めるために10年にわたって展開された運動が、集落や住民の生活にどのようなインパクトを与えたかを、同運動の発足初期と9-10年目に実施した2回のアンケート調査をもとに考察したものである。鳥取県智頭町では、1997年から、最小のコミュニティ単位である集落ごとに、長らく根づいていた保守性、閉鎖性、有力者支配の地域体質を打破し、地域を経営の視点で見直し、集落外と積極的に交流しつつ、住民自治を育む運動が開始された。智頭町にある89集落のうち15集落が、この運動に参加した。具体的には、従来の集落運営方式(世帯主だけが参加できる寄り合いで意思決定をし、それを住民全員の参加を義務とする総事で実行するという方式)は残しつつ、個人の資格でだれでも参加できるボランティア方式を新しく導入した。新しい方式の推進組織として集落振興協議会が設置され、行政(町役場)は、集落を代表する機関として協議会を認知し、支援することになった。<br> 同運動に参加する集落の全住民を対象に、発足初期の2000年と9-10年目に当たる2006年にアンケート調査を実施した(同運動は、10年を期限とする運動である)。その結果、①同運動は初期の段階で集落に浸透し、終始6割の住民が同運動に参加したこと、②同運動の理念を最も実現した集落では、伝統的な寄り合い組織と新しい集落振興協議会を、車の両輪のように使い分けていたこと、③伝統的な寄り合い組織が、同運動の民主的性格を帯びるに至った集落も存在すること、④2-3割の人が、同運動によって新しい自己実現の場を得、また、少子高齢化が進む集落にあっても明るい将来展望を持つようになったこと、⑤同運動によって、女性の発言力が増したことが見出された。同時に、10年間エネルギーを発揮し続けた裏返しとして、「この辺で一服」という正直な気持ちもあること、また、集落のレベルでは、潜在的なリーダー的人物もかなりの程度出尽くしたことも見出された。今後の展望として、すでに智頭町で始動している新しい運動、すなわち、地区(10集落程度で構成する:昭和の大合併以前の旧村に相当)単位で住民自治力を再生させようとする運動について言及した。

We analyzed how a ten-year revitalization movement enhanced self-governance by residents in Chizu, a typical depopulated rural area in Japan and how it changed the nature of community and the life of residents. The movement aimed to transform the traditional nature of community characterized by conservativeness, exclusiveness and control by a few rich residents into a community where residents could initiate new attempts to revitalize their lives by participative democracy and volunteer activities. In addition, an active exchange program outside the community was encouraged in the movement. Eight villages started the movement in 1997-98 and by 2000, a total of 15 villages had participated. There are a total of 89 villages in Chizu. A village is the smallest unit of community in Chizu composed of 10-50 households with approximately 50-150 residents. Each village established a village council as an organization to promote the revitalization movement and the town office recognized the council as formally representing the village.<br>   We administered a questionnaire survey twice in the eight villages; initially in 2000 after 3-4 years had passed since the commencement of the movement, and for the second time, in 2006 when 9-10 years had passed. During the ten-year period from 1997, we collaborated with residents while observing what happened as a result of the movement.<br>   We found that (1) the movement permeated throughout a village during the initial 3-4 years and about 60 % of residents continued to participate in it for ten years; (2) the goal of the movement was attained most successfully when two styles of decision-making were used: one was the traditional style in which only the head of household could participate and the other in which anyone could participate; (3) traditional meetings were affected by the movement and became more democratic, (4) 20-30% of residents discovered a new opportunity for their self-realization in the movement and increased their confidence in managing to live actively despite a decrease in birthrates and an increase in life expectancy; and (5) women became more influential than ever before. At the same time, it was found that residents wanted to have a rest after their ten-year transition and have time to explore how their revitalization activities could be continued in the future. Those who could play leadership roles did so in the first five years of the project but during the second half, the hoped for continuation was not sustained. We hypothesized that a larger unit would be required in order to implement changes because the populations of small villages had no more potential for change: their leaders had already emerged. However if the movement were to expand and continue in each traditional district including 10 or more villages, revitalization would be more successful with regard to continued participative democracy and self-governance by residents.

Journal

  • Journal of 'Group Dynamics'

    Journal of 'Group Dynamics' 27(0), 76-101, 2010

    Japan Institute for Group Dynamics

Codes

Page Top