A group of anti-TPP professors came up with their own estimates on the economic impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership free-trade talks. They estimated how tariff eliminations under the TPP pact will affect agricultural production and income in each prefecture. They also analyzed in detail the possible effects on rice farmers and related industries. Their estimates revealed that major agricultural producing prefectures will suffer severe damage, and that even large-scale rice farmers will be in the red. With the Upper House election coming up, the issues concerning the TPP talks should be discussed more from the viewpoint of farming business and local economies.
The economic effects of the TPP pact were calculated by the group of some 900 university professors and faculty members nationwide who are calling for immediate withdrawal from the TPP talks. The new estimates announced earlier this month, which follow the estimates announced in May, focus more on the specific effects on different regions and farms of different sizes. We highly appreciate their efforts, which was a complete contrast to the government’s attitude of trying to underestimate the adverse effects of the TPP agreement. The government has not responded to requests for region-by-region estimates, saying that the nationwide estimates are enough to evaluate the impact of the agreement. The government should be criticized for its insincere attitude of not disclosing information.
The group estimated the impacts on 19 items including rice, wheat, beef, dairy products and sugar, based on the same simulation as the government’s estimates. According to the group’s estimates, the prefectures whose agricultural production is estimated to drop by more than 40% in terms of value are Hokkaido, a major producing area of dairy products and sugar beets, and major rice producing areas such as Toyama and Fukui. The prefectures whose agricultural production is estimated to decline by more than 30% in value are Akita, Miyagi, Ishikawa and Shiga, which are highly dependent on rice production, and Kanagawa, a major pork producing region, as well as Kagoshima with many sugar cane farms and stockbreeders. In terms of agricultural income, Hokkaido, dubbed Japan’s food production center due to its thriving agriculture, livestock and dairy industries, is estimated to suffer the largest loss of 65.9 billion yen.
If a tariff on rice is eliminated, rice farmers who support the nation’s staple food will have difficulty surviving. According to the group’s estimates, among farmers growing four major crops including rice, farms working less than a hectare of farmland – accounting for more than 70% of total farms – will be in the red in terms of agricultural income, even including subsidies. Even in the case of large-scale farms with farmland of 10 hectares or more, the group estimates that they will suffer a large deficit if subsidies are excluded.
The adverse effects of tariff eliminations are not limited to the agricultural sector. The effects will spread to related industries, such as food, transportation and tourism industries. The decline in production value in manufacturing and service industries would amount to three times as much as that in the agricultural sector at the most, the group said. The TPP negotiations are an issue of concern for the rural economies as a whole.
Judging from the estimates, it is clear that the TPP pact goes against the government’s goal of doubling income in the agricultural industry and rural villages and improving self-sufficiency rates. Considering that the estimates are calculated on a limited number of items, the actual effects would be even worse. If the cycles of such systems as crop rotation and integrated crop-livestock farming are broken, it will trigger immeasurable chain reactions of harmful effects. Even if some farms managed to survive, it would become difficult to maintain community farming if rules regarding water rights and group works fail to work. Abolishing tariffs on agricultural products will have a profound effect on the agricultural sector, also because tariff revenues which are allocated to promoting crops and livestock production will be lost.
Nevertheless, it is insufficient to discuss the issue only from the viewpoint of economic impacts. We should not overlook the fact that the TPP agreement will give destructive effects, both material and moral, in various aspects. Deterioration of farmlands will do harm to the ecological and water systems, endangering the foundation of the national land conservation. The collapse of communities will undermine the people’s hearts and minds, social stability, food security and cultural traditions. The expected loss of ample blessings of nature and the pride of farmers do not appear in calculations. Let us think again of the adverse effects from our own perspective.
(July 13, 2013)