”Japanese-Specific Values” Regarding Public Investment”

Although the aging of infrastructure and natural disasters have long been recognized as problems, public investment has been declining year after year. This trend is largely driven by concerns about funding—such as the perception that “public investment equals wasteful spending”—as well as negative perceptions, including collusion between the construction industry and the government.

However, it’s not just that; there is also said to be a ”unique Japanese value system” regarding public investment. We spoke with Satoshi Nakao, an assistant professor at the Graduate School of Engineering at Kyoto University, to ask him about the sociocultural factors behind the backlash against public investment in Japan.

Has the civil engineering industry been looked down upon since around 1910?

――You’ve written several papers in the past on folklore and criticism of public investment. What sparked your interest in the relationship between the two?

Assistant Professor Nakao　I understood that there was a widespread negative sentiment toward public investment, but at the time, I believed that the main causes were issues of ”politics and money,” such as Kakuei Tanaka’s money-driven politics and the Lockheed scandal. However, the first time this thought crossed my mind was when I heard Akihiro Miwa sing ”Yoitomake no Uta” on the 2012 Kohaku Uta Gassen: “Could the real reason the civil engineering industry is disliked be influenced by national character?”

After that, I looked through some materials from the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, and I came across several references suggesting that the civil engineering industry already had a negative image around 1910, when the society was founded.

――What was it about?

Assistant Professor Nakao　For example, in the “Journal of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 1, No. 2,” published in 1915, it states: “It seems that when the term ‘civil engineering’ is used, it is more often employed as an adjective denoting ugliness or filth than in the sense of construction or architecture (Translation: The term ‘civil engineering’ carries connotations of ugliness or filth.)”

Since the issue of politics and money first came to the forefront around 1970, I became somewhat convinced that it was not the primary cause of the backlash against public investment, but rather that deeply rooted, traditional—in other words, folkloric—factors were at play.

――Since you began your research, what connections have you observed between folklore studies and the criticism of public investment?

Assistant Professor Nakao　It’s not as though there was a specific event or turning point that suddenly triggered this backlash against public investment. However, I do believe that the prevailing view of nature—one tied to the concept of ”kegare” (impurity)—plays a significant role.

“Kegare” refers to “the fear and anxiety that arise within human society when a deficiency occurs or the balance between humans and nature—which is, in its own way, a state of equilibrium—is disrupted” (Koji Yamamoto, “Impurity and Order in Aristocratic Society,” *Studies in Japanese History*, Vol. 287, pp. 28–54, 1986). The concept of kegare was expressed as early as the *Kojiki*.

Specifically, while death and illness were considered sources of impurity, other examples include making major human-induced changes to nature—such as moving massive rocks or trees—and altering the landscape.

It was believed that the occurrence of impurity was an act that angered the gods, and that this would manifest as ”divine punishment,” such as the death of the person responsible or a natural disaster. Civil engineering and construction projects—which involve human alterations to nature—create impurity that disrupts the balance between humans and nature, thereby inviting the wrath of the gods. Could it be that this lingering awareness of impurity is what continues to fuel skepticism toward public investment?

The prevailing view that “disasters are divine punishment” still persists today

――It’s true that the notion that “disasters are divine punishment” isn’t exactly uncommon…

Assistant Professor Nakao　Yes. For example, a letter to the editor published in the Mainichi Shimbun the same year the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake struck is particularly symbolic. It read: “The Nojima Fault runs along the northern tip of Awaji Island. I believe that the construction of the Akashi Kaikyo Bridge—with its constant pounding against the Nojima Fault—angered the sea god.”

In a well-known case, when an anti-project group (the plaintiffs) won a lawsuit concerning a construction project in Fukushima City, Hiroshima Prefecture, in the late 2000s, film director Hayao Miyazaki stated: said, “The era when development could settle matters is over. We should abandon the fantasy or illusion that public works projects will bring about dramatic change.” This perspective on nature is also reflected in Studio Ghibli films.

――Many Studio Ghibli films deal with environmental issues, don't they?

Assistant Professor Nakao　That’s right. Ghibli films offer glimpses of critical perspectives on public investment. *Princess Mononoke* depicts a conflict between a steel-making conglomerate that carves up the mountains to produce iron and the animal deities whose forest has been destroyed, who then become vengeful spirits. In *Spirited Away*, the bathhouse where the story is set is visited by deities who have been exhausted by excessive land development during the period of rapid economic growth.

Although these two films were huge hits, I suspect that the critical sentiment toward public investment held by many Japanese people played a major role in making the story resonate with audiences and strike a chord.

Furthermore, it’s not uncommon—not just in Studio Ghibli films—to find stories in which ”public investment triggers problems.” Perhaps through such works, a negative sentiment toward public investment has been taking root deep within our hearts since childhood.

――By the way, is the concept of “kegare” unique to Japan?

Assistant Professor Nakao　Generally speaking, this is not seen in the United States or European countries. However, it is frequently observed in East Asia—that is, in countries with Buddhist roots. Buddhism is based on the ”prohibition against killing,” which views the killing of all living things—from animals and insects to trees—as evil; consequently, development projects involving the exploitation of nature, such as public infrastructure projects, are naturally regarded as evil.

The recent criticism of public investment is off the mark

――Just as with the criticism of public investment, civil engineering and construction companies are sometimes viewed with skepticism. Could this trend also be influenced by “kegare”?

Assistant Professor Nakao　Yes. Since human interference with the soil is considered impure, there are quite a few studies that point out how marginalized communities have been forced to undertake civil engineering work. In other words, I believe they served as ”scapegoats” who were made to bear the impurity resulting from civil engineering projects. In fact, there is a documented history of people from discriminated-against communities working as civil engineers, and it has been confirmed that they were more likely to be employed in the construction industry.

Furthermore, while ”oni” have long been recognized as terrifying yokai and have been part of folklore since ancient times, some researchers speculate that the origin of the oni lies in the fact that ”miners”—a type of construction worker—were likened to oni. While the story of Momotaro is typically told as one in which he sets out to defeat an ogre who stole a treasure, it has been pointed out that the true origin might actually be the exact opposite of the version most people remember—namely, ”a story in which Momotaro seizes the gold and silver unearthed by a wandering miner (ogre) in the mountains.”

At Hachiman Kamado Shrine in Beppu City, Oita Prefecture—which has gained attention as a “Demon Slayer” pilgrimage site—the stone steps built by demons remain, accompanied by the legend that the demons were forced to construct them and were then driven away once the work was completed. When viewed from the demons’ perspective, the extermination of demons is not simply a heartwarming tale.

――It really seems that back in the day, there was a deeply ingrained belief that “land development isn’t something humans should be doing”…

Assistant Professor Nakao　That’s right. I think people involved in civil engineering and construction work have historically been viewed as outsiders and regarded as supernatural creatures like ogres and kappa. This attitude has carried over into the present day, and I suppose a certain degree of contempt toward civil engineers and construction workers still persists in some quarters.

――In the sense of “working the soil,” I suppose farmers are in a similar position, since they till the soil. Were farmers also viewed in a discriminatory light?

Assistant Professor Nakao　I don’t think that’s the case. During the Heian period, Onmyōdō—which enjoyed widespread support at the time—taught that ”the earth is inhabited by the Tsuchikō-gami,” and it was believed that the Tsuchikō-gami resided at a depth of 1 meter or more underground. Digging deeper than that was considered taboo and referred to as ”violating the earth,” but conversely, this implies that “it is okay to dig within 1 meter.”

Naturally, since they would starve to death if they couldn’t till the soil, it seems a somewhat cunning rule was established allowing them to “disturb the soil a little.”

――It’s amazing, in a way, that customs from the past still survive today.

Assistant Professor Nakao　That said, another major factor is that criticism of public investment as a waste of money has been frequently reported over the past 20 to 30 years. Time and again, public investment has been singled out with claims that “if Japan takes on any more debt, it will face financial collapse,” and every time public works spending increased, negative media coverage increased in tandem.

However, looking at the breakdown of the outstanding government bond balance, it is only special-purpose government bonds that have continued to increase, while construction bonds—which serve as a source of funding for public investment—have hardly increased at all. In other words, the recent criticism of public investment, as reported in the media, has missed the mark and has simply served to create a negative impression of public investment.

Even though the sharp increase in debt wasn’t due to public investment, public investment alone was made the scapegoat. Because a negative perception of civil engineering has long been widespread, this misguided bashing of public investment was likely accepted without much resistance.

Construction with an Eye for Aesthetics

――Is there a way to overcome the criticism of public investment and help people recognize its necessity?

Assistant Professor Nakao　First of all, I think it’s important to understand the background of what we’ve discussed today. Since there are quite a few people who unconsciously harbor an aversion to public investment, I believe it’s important—even if it’s a slow process—to first help them learn about the history and folklore of civil engineering that we’ve been discussing here.

――How should the civil engineering and construction industries approach their work going forward?

Assistant Professor Nakao　In the civil engineering and construction industries as well, it is important to understand the past. It is customary to hold a ground-breaking ceremony before starting construction, and while it is often viewed simply as a ritual to pray for safety, we must approach it with a clear understanding that our work involves altering the natural environment.

Furthermore, moving forward, rather than simply focusing on development and construction, we should take the landscape into consideration and pay attention to design—keeping the final visual appearance in mind. This will help shift the public’s mindset so that they come to think, “I’m not really a fan of public investment, but if it results in something good, then I guess it’s okay.”

Above all, isn’t it most important for those working in the civil engineering and construction industries to take pride in their work and hold their heads high, without letting the criticism of public investment get them down?