Tag: Japan

Japan’s demographic ruins

Japan’s urban ruins are a lesson for other countries facing an aging population

As Japan’s society ages and urbanises, the effects are being seen in buildings and communities being abandoned.

The Japan Times reports on how the nation is now becoming a magnet for urban explorers discovering what lies insides abandoned homes, hospitals, hotels and theme parks.

Many of the abandoned tourist attractions are legacies of the 1980s economic boom that saw a massive over-investment in property plays. With a shrinking population, those facilities were always doomed but in a growing society, there would have been economic reasons for redeveloping them.

In Japan though, those economic drivers don’t exist in much of the country as the Japan Times explains.

“Japan is in some sense uniquely blessed as a land of ruins. Its rapidly aging population, low birth rate, urbanization and lack of immigration have left a legacy of ghost towns and more than 8 million abandoned homes, or akiya. That tally could hit 21.5 million, one-third of all residences nationwide, by 2033, according to the Nomura Research Institute.”

Japan is the first of many nations that will face the consequences of an aging population, what they do will be a lesson to all of those who follow. Of those, China will probably the biggest experiment.

One big lesson is property demand changes and once valuable assets don’t necessarily hold their value in the face of a societal shift.

Japan looks to startups

Japan’s efforts to encourage startups is a pointer to the rest of the world’s economic future

Can Japan reinvigorate its startup community? A story in the Wall Street Journal describes some of the attempts to encourage entrepreneurs in an economy that has been stagnant for a quarter century.

In many ways Japan is a prototype for the modern global economy, just as the Japanese tried to stimulate their economy following their 1989 bust by pumping money into their deeply corrupt construction industry , so too has the rest of the world tried a similar strategy with the banking system after the 2008 crisis.

The results in both cases been the same stagnation as the money is wasted on non productive schemes and speculation rather than investment in job and wealth creating businesses and innovations.

Now the Japanese are looking to a bottom up stimulus to their economy which challenges the country’s social norms where getting a ‘safe job’ with a large corporation is seen as the best prospect for young people.

While this is a change from the accepted wisdom, the entrepreneurial model really isn’t that strange for the Japanese with a range of successful technology companies started by post World War II entrepreneurs ranging from Sony to Softbank.

The Japanese model though may not be suited to the Silicon Valley venture capital model and this is where it’s dangerous to make comparisons with what works in San Jose, Tel Aviv or Shoreditch.

Japan’s strengths in industrial engineering may well make its businesses well suited for the Internet of Things the Wall Street Journal article quotes serial entrepreneur Taizo Son as suggesting. Interestingly, the 43 year old serial entrepreneur is the youngest brother of SoftBank founder Masayoshi Son.

Another area where Japan is a glimpse of the future is in the aging population and it may well be that harnessing the abilities of older entrepreneurs is another area where the country can either show the way to success or what not to do with an older, stagnant economy.

In many ways Japan is a pointer to where the world is heading. How they manage the early twenty-first century will be a lesson for the rest of us.

Seppuku for the health care sector?

The assisted suicide Seppukuma robot raises some interesting ethical questions and challenges how secure employment is in the health sector

It turns out Seppukuma is a parody and I fell for it. My apologies.

Continuing the theme of Japanese robotics meet SeppuKuma, the friendly robot bear that might be the last thing you ever see.

When we look at the future of work, health care comes up as one of the fields that is least vulnerable to automation. Seppukuma shows we shouldn’t take that for granted.

Seppukuma is also an interesting example of how technology can subvert laws. Banning assisted suicide means little when a robot can be programmed to it.

As cheap and accessible robotics become commonplace so too do devices like suicide assisting androids which raise a whole range of legal and ethical issues.

Even though Seppukuma is a joke, the technology is feasible. We need to consider the issues and risk these devices will raise.

Replacing Japan’s workers with robots

Japan is leading the world in deploying workplace robots. Their lessons will be watched by many other societies.

Nearly half of Japan’s jobs could be done by computers, robots or artificial intelligence in the near future, says the Nomura Research Institute.

In working with Oxford University’s Martin Program on Technology and Employment, the Nomura Research Institute examined 601 job classifications that currently employ 42.8 million Japanese.

Using the Oxford University methodology, the Japanese researchers estimated more than two thirds of the roles could be automated with nearly half of all Japanese workers being potentially replaced by computers.

Previously the Martin program has estimated  47 per cent of the United States’ workforce and just over a third of Britain’s are vulnerable to similar changes. Anyone who’s visited or lived in Japan wouldn’t be surprised at the relatively high level of vulnerability given the degree of manual jobs still being done in Japanese society that were long ago lost in the rest of the western world.

For Japan, replacing workers with robots isn’t a bad option given the population is aging force and the nation is at best reluctant to import immigrants to address skills shortages. It’s not surprising the country is probably the most advanced at deploying robots in workplaces.

How this will work for an aging Japan that has to support an increasingly older population will be fascinating to see. For other western countries – or even China – facing similar pressures, the Japanese will be providing important lessons.

Japan’s adjustment to a low growth society

Japan’s decades of malinvestment are a lesson for all aging and slowing economies

As the world worries about whether China is the next Japan, the Japanese themselves are getting on with life in a low growth economy.

One of the latest ideas is to convert disused golf courses into solar energy farms as manufacturing giant Kyocera proposes a solution to deal with the nation’s power shortage after the closure of the Fukushima power plants.

Japan’s golf course boom of the 1980s, which they exported around the world, was a classic case of overinvestment driven by easy money and lax lending standards. Something that China has certainly had in spades.

The aging nation isn’t doing a perfect job however with the Washington Post reporting that the country’s over 65s are convicted of more crimes than juveniles and the sad reason is seniors are shoplifting to survive.

One of the major mistakes made by Japanese governments through the 1990s was to pour money into corrupt civil projects to stimulate the economy. That money was largely wasted on bridges to nowhere and bullet trains to tiny towns which did little to add to the nation’s productivity or build a safety net for the aging population.

Japan may well be leading the way for other aging nations, we need to heed their mistakes before our societies follow them.

Why Australia needs foreign ownership

Foreign investment is making up for the lack of Australian interest in local assets.

Such are the vagaries of radio that I’ve been asked to comment on ABC Radio South Australia about foreign ownership based on an article that was picked up by The Drum 14 months ago.

That article was written shortly after Dick Smith came out grumbling about the prospect of Woolworths selling the electronics store chain named after him to foreign interests.

My point at the time was that foreign owners would be preferable to some poorly managed, undercapitalised local buyer as the Australian retail industry – even in a declining market like consumer electronics – needs more innovation and original thinking.

As it turned out, Dick Smith Electronics was sold to Anchorage Capital, a private equity turn around fund with an interesting portfolio of businesses.

In the meantime, the argument about foreign ownership of property and businesses, particularly farms, has ratcheted up as opportunistic politicians and the shock jock peanut gallery that sets much of Australia’s media agenda have found a cheap, jingoistic issue to score points from.

So why is foreign ownership of businesses like farms, mines and factories important for Australia?

A fair price for hard work

The main reason for supporting foreign buyers for Aussie businesses is it gives entrepreneurs a chance to get a fair price for their hard work.

A farmer or factory owner who builds their business shouldn’t have to accept a lower price because Australians don’t want to pay for the asset.

It’s not a matter of being able to pay Australians as have plenty of money to invest – a trillion dollars in superannuation funds and three billion dollars claimed for negative losses in 2009-10 show there’s plenty of money around – it’s just that Aussies don’t want to invest in farming, mining or other productive sectors.

We’re already seeing this play out in the small business sector as baby boomer proprietors find they aren’t going to sell their ventures for what they need to fund their retirement.

Access to capital

Should the protectionists get their way then the businesses and farms will eventually be sold to undercapitalised Australian investors at knock down prices.

This is the worse possible thing that could happen as not only do the entrepreneurs miss out, but also the factories and farms decline as they are starved of capital investment.

Cubby Station

A good example of both the lack of capital affecting investment and finding a fair price for ventures is Queensland’s Cubby Station.

While I personally think Cubby Station is an example of the economic bastardry and environmental vandalism that are the hallmarks of the droolingly incompetent National Party and its corrupt cronies, the venture itself is a good example of why the agriculture sector needs foreign investment.

Having been converted from cattle to cotton in the 1970s, Cubbie grew as successive owners acquired water licenses from surrounding properties.

Eventually the company collapsed under the weight of its debts in 2009 and the property was allowed to run down by the administrators until it was bought by Chinese backed interests at the beginning of 2013.

At the time of the acquisition, the company’s former chairman told The Australian,  “on reflection, I would go into those things with an even stronger balance sheet — in other words, with less gearing.”

In other words, the company was under-capitalised.

Competition concerns

Another reason for encouraging foreign ownership is that Australia has become the Noah’s Ark of business with duopolies dominating most key sectors.

Bringing in foreign owners at least offers the prospect of having alternatives to the comfortable two horse races that dominate most industries.

The property market

An aspect that has excited the peanut shock jocks has been the prospect of Chinese buyers purchasing all the country’s property.

For those of us with memories longer than goldfish, today’s Chinese mania is almost identical to the Japanese buying frenzy of the late 1980s.

Much of what we read about the Chinese buying homes is self serving tosh from property developers and real estate agents and what mania there is will peter out in a similar way to how the Japanese slowly withdrew.

This isn’t to say there shouldn’t be concerns about foreign ownership – tax avoidance, loss of sovereignty and Australia’s small domestic market are all valid questions that should be raised about overseas buyers, but overall much of the hysteria about foreign ownership is misplaced.

What Australians should be asking is why the locals aren’t investing in productive industries or buying mining and farming assets.

The answer almost certainly is that we’d rather stick with the ‘safety’ of the ASX 200 or the residential property market.

We’ve made our choices and we shouldn’t complain when Johnny Foreigner sees opportunities that beyond negative geared investment units or an tax advantaged superannuation fund.

Australia in the Asian Century – Chapter Three: Australia in Asia

Chapter two of Australia in the Asian Century attempts to predict the development of the region’s economies over the next decade

This post is one of the series of articles on the Australia in the Asian Century report. An initial overview of the report is at Australian Hubris in the Asian Century.

The third Chapter of the Australia in the Asian Century report, “Australia in Asia” attempts to define the role the country currently plays in the region. In some ways this is the most constructive part of the paper in that it describes the lost opportunities of the last 25 years.

Much of the early part of the chapter traces the development of Australia’s engagement with Asia after World War II; Chifley’s post war efforts with the United Nations, Menzies’ engagement with Japan, Whitlam’s going to China, Fraser’s opening to Vietnamese immigration and Hawke’s work on building the APEC agreement are all noted.

Again are the major wars that also formed Australia’s current position in East Asia – World War II, the Malayan Emergency, the Korean and Vietnamese wars – are barely mentioned. This trivialises some of the major influences in today’s complex tapestry of relationships

Of Australia’s closest Asian neighbour, the fall of Sukarno gets a brief nod but Suharto’s removal, the rise of Indonesian democracy and East Timor are all removed from the narrative. There is also no mention of other internal dislocations like the Cultural Revolution or the Indian Partition, all which still have echos today.

In the introduction the Colombo Plan gets a mention and it’s worth reflecting upon its effects.

When I worked in Bangkok in the early 1990s there were a number of business leaders who had been educated in Australia under Colombo Plan scholarships.

That investment by Australia paid dividends through the 1980s and 90s as many of those scholarship students were ardent supporters of Australian businesses and government.

One wonders how today’s students who’ve been treated as milk cows by Australian governments and “seats on bums” to education institutions will feel about the country when they enter business and political leadership positions over the next decade?

The examples of Australian business engagement in Asia are interesting – Blundstone’s is a straight out manufacturing outsourcing story which doesn’t really describe anything not being done by thousands of other businesses while Tangalooma Island Resort is a light of hope in the distressed Australian tourism industry.

A notable omission is how digital media, apps developers and service businesses are faring in Asia. There are many good case studies in those sectors but the writers seem to be, once again, fixated on the trade patterns of the 1980s and 90s rather than success stories in new fields and emerging technologies.

Generally though the description of the Australian economy is again more of the same; a combination of self congratulations on having a government AAA credit rating, hubris over avoiding a GFC induced recession and stating how the services sector has risen to replace the manufacturing that’s been outsourced by companies like Blundstone.

Overall Chapter Three of the Australia in the Asian Century report illustrates the opportunities missed in the last 25 years. Had this report been written twenty years ago it could have forecast a booming relationship in the services and advanced manufacturing sectors. It almost certainly would have included an observation that the days of the Australian economy depending upon minerals exports is over.

What a difference a couple of decades make.

The engagement of Australia with Asia concludes with a look at the changes to the nation’s immigration intakes and demographic composition. This point is, quite rightly, identified as an area of opportunity.

Having Thai restaurants in every suburb and Indian doctors in most country town isn’t really taking advantage of the opportunities presented by having a diverse population and workforce. Chapter Four attempts to look at how these factors, and others, can help Australia’s engagement with the Asian economies.

Australia in the Asian Century – Chapter One: The rise of Asia

Chapter one of Australia in the Asian Century looks at how the region’s economies developed

This post is one of the series of articles on the Australia in the Asian Century report. An initial overview of the report is at Australian Hubris in the Asian Century.

“Just over two decades ago, the Australian Government commissioned a study of Australia and the Northeast Asian ascendancy” starts the opening of the Australia in the Asian Century report. That sentence describes how this paper is the latest of Australia’s earnest efforts to understand the region.

The opening chapter of the report follows the sensible principle that to plan for the future we have to first understand the present so this section seeks to explain the development of various Asian economies and put those changes into an Australian perspective.

Notable in the narrative is the North East Asian focus, while India gets a brief mention most of the story revolves around the development of China, Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea. Chart 1.2, “Asia’s economic dividend” gives the game away when all but one ‘Asian’ country listed is East Asian.

Russia, along with most of South and Central Asia – not to mention other Asia countries like Iran, Turkey and the former Soviet Republics – rate no mention all.

The narratives around the countries which are covered is also deficient – for instance the discussion on Japan’s, South Korea’s and Vietnam’s developments totally ignore post-war reconstruction efforts and their relations with the United States.

China does get a more detailed examination rightly noting it was the country’s admission to the World Trade Organisation in 2001 that really set the economy’s export sector moving, however it skates over the massive dislocations and market reforms introduced in the 1980s which laid the foundations for China’s successful bid to join the WTO.

More notably, the analysis overlooks – probably to avoid upsetting PRC diplomats and making life difficult in Canberra – the role of Taiwanese investment in China and Taiwan’s development itself.

In a similar vein the scant discussion of India misses the role of Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) in the country’s economic development along with the concentration of power in the various industrial conglomerates like the Tata Group.

Again, the same omission is made when discussing the South Korean Chaebols and Japanese Keiretsu. Given the investments made in Australia by all of these industrial conglomerates it’s curious they barely rate a mention in discussing Asia’s industrialisation process.

The discussion on innovation in Chapter 1.3 is useful however it lacks substance in identifying exactly which sectors various Asian economies are specialising in and which industries are in decline as various countries move up the value chain.

Singapore’s success in becoming East Asia’s hub for banking and corporate regional headquarters is a notable omission and again one has a suspicion this is because of ongoing Australian governments’ doomed ambitions to establish Sydney as a regional financial and business centre.

Probably the most glaring omission in Chapter One though is the role of the United States. In tracking the rise of the Indian service sector or Chinese, Japanese and South Korean manufacturing the trade policies of the US cannot be ignored. And yet they largely are.

That failure to acknowledge the US role means report overlooks the Clinton and Bush I Administrations’ forced opening East Asia’s largely closed economies which radically changed South Korea, Taiwan and Japan in the late 1980s and early 90s. Not to mention the critical role the US had during that period in allowing China and Vietnam to join the global trade networks.

Chapter One of Australia in the Asian Century is an unsatisfactory introduction to the complexities of the Asian economies and one suspects is because of the compromises made to assuage the egos and groupthink of Canberra’s mandarins and politicians.

Most importantly, it fails to put the last thirty years’ developments in Asia into an Australian context or perspective. In this respect, it’s a fitting start to a largely inadequate report.

Enter the Dragon

The development of Aliyun, a mobile phone software package, illustrates how Chinese industry is moving up the value chain.

Once up a time our parents laughed at the tinny little Japanese cars – in the 1960s companies with silly names like Toyota and Mazda could never threaten world giants like Chrysler, Ford and General Motors.

Within two decades the Japanese had moved their products up the value chain leaving their American and European competitors running scared while governments in western countries offered the new leaders of the manufacturing industries bribes to set up plants in their towns and states.

It was always obvious China would follow the same course as the Japanese, particularly given the country’s position as the world’s cheap labor supplier had a time limit thanks to the demographic effects of the 1970s One Child Policy.

So it’s no surprise that Alibaba, China’s biggest e-commerce service, has built its own mobile operating system to compete with Google’s Android.

If Aliyun follows the Japanese development path, the first version is terrible but within five years – the development cycle of software is a lot quicker than that of cars – Alibaba will be a viable competitor to Google and Android.

Chinese developers moving into the mobile market is terrible news for the also rans like Microsoft and Blackberry. As Apple dominate the premium mobile sector and Android the mass market, it’s very hard for those running third or lower to achieve the critical mass needed to be competitive. Aliyun makes it much harder for them to gain any traction in high growth developing markets.

An interesting aspect of the Wall Street Journal’s story is how Aliyun is aimed at the domestic Chinese market for the moment. This is part of China’s economy moving away from being overly reliant on exports, having locally made products that meet the needs and aspirations of a growing domestic economy is an important part of this process.

Exports though will remain an important part of the Chinese economy for most of this century and value added products like Aliyun will be important for China as the cheap labour advantage erodes over the next two decades.

Businesses who think their markets are protected because their quality is better than their Chinese competitors may be in for a nasty shock, just like the 20th Century auto makers who dismissed the Japanese were in the 1970s.

Whether Aliyun is successful or not, we’re once again seeing many of the facile assumptions about Chinese growth being tested as the country’s economy and society evolves.

Six billion pairs of socks

How shallow beliefs don’t substitute for economic analysis or business sense

Ever since the days of Napoleon business people have lusted over the idea of selling into the Chinese market – the idea of a billion people clambering to buy just one widget each brings a gleam to the eyes of even jaded entrepreneurs.

When Deng Xaioping opened the Chinese economy in the mid 1980s Australian brewers, Swiss watchmakers and German motor manufacturers rushed into the country believing that a billion liberated peasants would rush to buy expensive beer and watches.

As it turned out, the real opportunities for foreigners were in the other direction. When China joined the World Trade Organisation in 2001 the boom that had already started in the Special Economic Zones along the southern Chinese coast spread across the Eastern provinces as manufacturing from Hong Kong, Japan and Taiwan to find cheaper labour.

300km South-West of Shanghai the city of Datang became “sock town” where local companies manufactured a third of the world’s sock supply.

Chinese sock manufacturers became so competitive that their Japanese counterparts were forced to move upmarket in an effort to secure a position in an industry awash with cheap products.

Today the Chinese sock industry is looking sick as manufacturers go broke and inventories pile up reports The Observer.

Excess capacity is a problem in many industries, particularly motor manufacturing where governments around the world have supported their local producers resulting in a glut of cars and trucks. Socks are no exception to the laws of supply and demand.

The travails of China’s sock industry are a cautionary tale for those who project straight lines for Chinese growth.

Facile assumptions that every man, woman and child on the planet needs to buy two pairs of socks a year, or that China will build millions of steel hungry apartments each year, is not economic analysis and any business built on such shaky beliefs is leaving itself vulnerable when things don’t work out.

The same is true for nations. Hollow assumptions can put an entire economy on shaky ground. Just thinking that every Chinese family needs six pairs of socks doesn’t guarantee economic success.