Definition of pre-modern growth
The income per capita advantage enjoyed
before the Industrial Revolution (IR) by subsequently first-world
developed countries (Europe, its offshoots and Japan). Meaning that
income level before IR would be a proxy of incomes level in 1973.
The very peculiar Japanese case
The second half of Tokugawa period in Japan
was characterized by a steady if slow output growth while
population remained unchanged (eg. +3% in 1721-46). What combination
of factors held population in check for this long in the face of
expanding output especially after previous rapid growth is one of
the most important and mysterious secret of Japanese social history (128). Although, these advantages were not evenly distributed.
If both the West and Japan knew pre-modern
growth before IR, the nature of that pre-modern growth was different:
urban population stagnated or decreased in the most advanced parts of
the country; although, lesser castle-towns located in backward areas
went on growing thanks to artisans and merchants in-migration.
Smith argues that without a considerable degree of de-urbanization no growth could have taken place (130).
He estimates the decline of urban at 18% (1700-1850). The urban
population declined as neighbouring rural population was growing
(Hiroshima 33%; the countryside +66%).
Proto-industrial Japan
The most commonly cited reason for the urban
population decline was the development of rural trades and industries.
The government tried to fight that trend, however ineffectively. The
consequences of putting-out were often dramatic for the towns. The
reasons evoked being: guild and municipal regulations and higher costs.
Towns also lost their monopoly on
interregional exports (foodstuff) or imports (manufactured items). The
phenomenon accelerated after 1750. Higher wages (for weavers for
instance) appear to be the real engine of this town-to-country
in-migration. Salaries in the country seem to have significantly higher
(1840s).
The advantages of the country were the
following: (1) nearer from raw material and waterpower, (2) close to
growing rural market, (3) workers more authority-abiding (in the
absence of real commercial legal system), (4) by-employment (farm +
industry = lower wages), (5) less taxes and guilds regulations.
Consequences
Government was farming to urban merchants
monopoly over some goods. But enforcement of these grants in the
country was nearly impossible (most of the administration being local,
the samurais having been relocated in the towns in the 17th century).
But in Japan (unlike Europe) there was no
intercontinental trade, no port towns to develop. Significantly, when
international trade was restored, population resumed growing.
If there is more work, why isnt it more
people? Somehow rural households incomes are kept close to subsistence
level. As they remain partly dependent to farming the small size of the
fields acts as a powerful check (abortions and infanticides rates
also remained high). Besides, adoption didnt force the peasants to
have a male heir to inherit the land.
The reason why the towns population in the
advanced areas decreased and not in the more backward one was because
precisely advanced areas countryside had a comparative advantage
(being close from consumption centres) that helped develop their
proto-industries and checked the migration to the towns. Having no
by-employment available, the backward countrysides populations went on
moving to the towns.
The result of the Japaneses path to
pre-modern growth was the shrinking of the urban bourgeoisie completely
dominated by the military and administrative nobility (unlike Europe).
Consequently, rural entrepreneurs became central figures in the
islands economy, a powerful class in itself, mightier than any town
merchant. On the contrary of the later, the new comers are firmly
opposed to any governments regulation. Ultimately, they proved opposed
to the closed hierarchical system of the shogunate that limited their
growth. Rural uprisings ensued.
Aftermath
The government didnt manage to profit from
the pre-industrial growth because it failed to efficiently tax the
countryside. The budget shrank and consequently the samurais grew
poorer, weakening the whole Tokugawa system
This affected Japans first
industrialization, as before the 1930s it was mainly centred on light
industries (textile) produced by small, labour-inensive units of
production with little bank or state direct action.
This was made possible by the fact that the
work force shaped by proto-industry was rather skilful, ready to
migrate and commercial networks pre-existed. This view seems supported
by the fact that most of the modern industrialization took place in the
place that had benefited the most from the proto-industrialization wave.
Discussion
The comparison is interesting, but the claim
that only Europe and Japan had proto-industry is clueless, and the
presentation of Japan as a completely close country has been revised
now.