Unwelcome to Country

Rural regions may want revitalisation without repopulation.

"Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down." -- Paul Weyrich, Conservative political activist. 

 

Governments pledge revitalisation efforts for rural regions in addition to the resources they already receive.

At the same time urbanisation advances, implying that at the very least, these efforts are not making rural regions attractive places to live.

While resources could go some way to providing amenities of the city, like fast internet and transport links, the rural setting continues to foster local character that is distrustful of outsiders and sensitive to convention and community conformity (Wagenfeld 2003). Moving to country (inaka) Japan entails observing all sorts of obligatory mores - gift giving to neighbours, joining an agricultural association (農業協会 nōgyō kyōkai),  etc - to fit in.

While they may not have been voluntarily acquired, attitudes and practices which newcomers and less conventional residents may find off-putting are not being discarded.

Perhaps this is strategic.

In political systems with representation by area, regions have the same power regardless of population. This gives rural voters more power than urban voters.

So a Fukui-prefecture voter's vote is worth 16 times that of a Tokyo-ite's.

The power of rural states in the US Senate will probably keep the US Supreme Court drifting more conservative, essentially reflecting their agenda. Likewise, the US Electoral College gives electors in rural states an advantage in choosing the president.

While there are usually legal mechanisms to address voter imbalance, boundaries are not being re-drawn fast enough to keep pace with urbanisation.

This power imbalance is sometimes embraced as a shield against being steamrolled or neglected by more numerous, better-resourced, out-of-touch metropolitan elites. In more polarised times, rural regions have been cast as bastions of traditional rustic decency in the face of progressive urban decadence. 

"Use the countryside to surround the city"

Less democratic governments must also keep the countryside close. The Chinese Communist Party keeps China's own rust-belt regions on-side with coal power, coal mines, and the Belt and Road, mindful that rural areas instrumental in toppling the Nationalist government could repeat the feat to their demise.

Cue COVID-19 and predictions of an exodus to rural regions. However, previous pandemics did not dent urbanisation's 500-year history.

So with every city-dweller dissuaded from moving out country, political power is preserved. With every resident lost to the city or to time, it is concentrated.

✞

The resulting cultural uniformity could be considered evidence of resilient values. However, given that some of these values include mining fossil fuels and intolerance of minorities, they could also be merely clear signals to politicians as to how to pander to these powerful electorates, in contrast to the confusing cacophony of diverse urban interests.

We should not be surprised that politicians jump at the chance for obvious pathways to power.

The countryside has every incentive to accept resources yet not be welcoming. Rather than condemning it for being unreceptive, perhaps we can remember to be pleasantly astounded when it is not. 😉

Extra reading:

Ezra Klein - Rural vs Urban subsidies

Subsidies - it's not so simple

Review of Japan's Regional revitalisation (地方創生 Chihō sōsei). It's mixed.