ABSTRACT
Mass sport development in Japan can broadly be understood in relation to two policy objectives set by two different ministries with an interest in the policy area, namely, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (hereafter MEXT) and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (hereafter MHLW). While MEXT is principally in charge of overall policy for sport and school sport/physical education (PE), the area of concern for MHLW policy is around health, welfare and the well-being of citizens, which embrace the areas of mass participation in physical activities and exercises. The current sports policy goal in Japan is to ‘realise a lifelong sport participation society
where all citizens can enjoy sport based on their physical strength, age, skills and interests and objectives at any stage of life, anytime and anywhere’, and this will lead to the realisation of ‘a bright, fulfilling, and vital society in the twenty-first century’ (emphasis added, MEXT 2006). In September 2000, MEXT published (and revised in 2006) the master plan for sport, the Basic Plan for the Promotion of Sports (2001-2010) (hereafter the Basic Plan), which outlined a triad policy in sport (increasing lifelong participation in sport, increasing high-performance success in international sports events and widening opportunity for PE and school sport). Policy for mass sport development corresponds to the policy objective to ‘establish a lifelong sport participation society’. The quantitative policy objective is to have more than 50 per cent of adults engaged in sports activities at least once a week. To achieve this target, the Basic Plan has defined two ‘indispensable’ areas of policy: i) the development of a minimum of one Comprehensive Community Sports Club (CCSC) per municipality by 2010; and ii) the development of at least one Sports Centre covering a Wide Area (sic) in each prefecture. The emphasis on the development of clubs and sports centres is based on the assumption that the development and maintenance of sports clubs and ensuring the widest accessibility will ‘enable all lovers of sports, from children to the elderly, to participate in sports according to their interests and goals in their local areas’ (MEXT 2006). As stated, the above-mentioned objective is one of the three-pillar policy objectives set out in
the Basic Plan. The other two are: i) the improvement of children’s physical strength and fitness through the promotion of sport; and ii) the enhancement of international competitiveness.
When the Basic Plan was first published in 2000, the decline in children’s fitness was not recognised as an urgent policy concern and was initially identified as a ‘related policy area’ to the lifelong sports participation and competitive sport (MEXT 2000). However, the revised Basic Plan of 2006 highlighted the significance, and urgency, of developing the ‘human skills (personal capacity development)’ of children through improving their physical abilities and fitness. Ever since the hosting of the 1964 Tokyo Olympic Games, the Japanese government has annually conducted the ‘Survey into Physical Strength and Exercise Ability (Tairyoku Undo--nouryoku Cho-sa)’ tracking trends in children’s physical strength, fitness and abilities as well as their physical development. Through this survey, it has identified that a steady decline in children’s fitness and a gradual increase in physical size have taken place since 1985.1 With this accumulated evidence, a nationwide programme designed to ‘raise awareness of the decline in children’s physical fitness and to develop an attractive sporting environment’ was established as the ‘indispensable policy objectives’ of mass sport participation (MEXT 2006). By dropping the long-established association with elite sport policy, the roles of education and community sport were emphasised and the idea of the CCSC was introduced to create a pathway between school sports clubs and community. In light of rapid societal and demographical change in Japan as well as the influence of glo-
balisation, the CCSC system has stimulated huge expectations not only that the clubs will encourage children to experience a wide range of sports and non-sports activities, but also that they will develop and promote the cohesion of community by enabling volunteering by citizens. In 2001 MEXT published a Manual for the Development of Comprehensive Community Sports Club to allow upcoming clubs to understand the best practice, particularly in relation to the autonomous management of the clubs (MEXT 2001). It defines ‘comprehensive’ as being broadly synonymous with ‘variety’, namely, variety in sports disciplines, age range, interests, skills, and abilities. It further specifies that a wide range of sports and cultural activities should be organised and managed by the citizens of the community who should be recruited from a broad social and demographic background. The CCSC is expected to have a designated facility equipped with a club house and supervised by high-quality coaches (or instructors) to meet the individual needs (MEXT 2001). It is generally acknowledged that the ideas and values of the CCSC come from the German
(community) sports club system (Kurosu 2007; Yamaguchi 2006). Modelled on the German system, the CCSC is expected to feature an autonomous management system that requires not only that a substantial proportion of income should be generated through membership subscriptions, but also that the clubs should provide high-quality management and coaching. The objective of the CCSC initiative is to find interconnections between mass participation in sport and community building based on the assumption that the former will facilitate the latter (Matsuo 2001). The policy concern of the MHLW is related to the prevention of lifestyle-related diseases,
the reduction of the incidence of illness, the promotion of healthy lifestyles, and the improvement of mental well-being. As opposed to the emphasis on mass participation in sport, the MHLW promotes nationwide mass participation in ‘physical activity (shintai-katsudo-)’ and ‘exercises (undo-)’. The ‘Nation Health Promotion Strategy for the 21st Century (known as Kenkou Nippon 21, orHealthy Nippon 21)’ was published by the MHLW in 2000 as a ‘health policy’ and its ten-year policy goal is to ‘realise a healthy and bright ageing society’ (MHLW 2000). The ministry had predicted that, by 2006, Japan would have become an ageing society, where more than 20 per cent of the population would be over 65 years of age. The Healthy Nippon 21 strategy was aimed at preventing the elderly population from becoming predominantly bedridden and improving the quality of life for all. It also aspired to establish a ‘world leading model’ for an
ageing society (MHLW 2000). As the MHLW is also responsible for the national health care system, one of the objectives through Health Nippon 21 was to decrease the cost of national health care. To promote health-related exercise nationwide the government enacted the Health Promotion Law in 2002 which obliged citizens to ‘be aware of, and understand the significance of, a healthy lifestyle and engaged in promoting health by being conscious of one’s health’ (Clause 2). With the implementation of the Health Promotion Law, Healthy Nippon 21 was revised accordingly in 2008 and, together with its Exercise Guide, provided a series of performance targets and definitions (Consultative Group for Exercise Requirements and Exercise Guideline 2006). Physical activity was defined as the consumption of more energy than resting; ‘exercise’ was defined as ‘physical activities planned and intended to maintain and improve physical fitness’; while ‘lifestyle activity’ was defined as ‘non-exercise physical activity including activity through one’s occupation’. The policy then specified nine areas of health care that can prevent lifestyle-related diseases and lead to an ‘extended healthy life span’2 (MHLW 2000). In relation to the promotion of a ‘bright’ and ‘vivid’ society populated by healthy citizens engaged in sport and exercise, the policy areas of MEXT and MHLW resembled each other to a considerable degree. However, the blurred nature of the definitions of what constitutes sport, physical activity and exercise and the distinction between sports promotion and health promotion has created ministerial conflicts. It can also be argued that the overlap between the policies of MEXT and MHLW has attracted criticism that the policy area is ‘cluttered’ and policy is ineffective.
