The China Group Workshop was held for two days, September 20-21 (Monday-Tuesday), at Sano Shoin, Hitotsubashi University. While I have been a member of the China Group for longtime, I had been caught up with administration at my university and not been able to contribute much to the research. Fortunately, I was able to participate fully for both days of the conference. In this report, I summarize the proceedings of the workshop. First, the program schedule was as follows:
Economic Statistics of the Republic Period: Evaluation and Estimates
September 20(Monday)-21(Tuesday),1999
Program
Session 1-1 National Income
| Presenter | Matsuda Yoshiro "An Analysis of Modern China's GDP Growth." |
| Discussant | Yamamoto Yuzo |
Session 1-2: Public Finance
| Presenter | Jin Pusen, "Public Finance and Foreign Loans in the Bei-Yang Governments Period." |
| Discussant | Kaneko Hajime |
Session 2: Agriculture
| Presenter | Makino Fumio, Luo Huanzhen, and Ma Debin, "Agriculture Production Statistics in Republican China." |
| Presenter | Cao Xingsui, "Republican Period Agricultural Surveys: Evaluation and Usage" |
| Discussant | Yoshida Koichi |
Session 3-1 Prices
| Presenter | Wang Yuru, "Calculating Modern China Price Indices." |
| Discussant | Wang Yehchien |
Session 3-2 Trade
| Presenter | Kose Hajime, "Looking at the 1920s through China Maritime Customs Statistics." |
| Discussant | Chen Zhenping |
Session 4: Industry
| Presenter | Kubo Toru, Yue Wei, Makino Fumio, "Republican Period Industrial Production Estimates." |
| Discussant | Huang Hanmin, Kanemaru Yuichi |
There were 44 participants from within Japan (14 of them Chinese), and 6 from overseas (5 from China, 1 from Taiwan). In addition, there were 11 translators, observers, and Chinese and Taiwanese graduate students. The workshop indicated that the themes the COE China Group has been analyzing are beginning to be widely known among researchers in Japan and in other countries. I have been told that the workshop intends to publish a record of the proceedings, including the papers presented and their comments, in both Japanese and Chinese. In this report, I would like to briefly introduce some of the main points of discussion. Prof. Odaka Konosuke, as the representative for the entire COE project, provided the concluding summary comments for the Workshop. The comments were extremely insightful, and there is no need for me to make redundant comments here. Instead, I present below some personal views on issues that should be addressed in the future.
This point relates to the question of how far back can one make estimations of national income, and also to how to treat production for self-consumption, usually a large percentage of production in undeveloped economies. More specifically, how far removed are we from the original definitions of the concept of "national income", if we generate national income estimates for 1840s China?
Of course, this problem is not limited to only the China Group, but is relevant to the entire COE project, and one that we must keep in mind as we compile the data.
When generating national income for areas that were informally or formally colonized, the definitions of "national" and "domestic," and differentiating between resident and non-resident becomes more difficult than for usual calculations of national income. China was subject to external pressures through the "spheres of influence" wielded by the Great Powers. Thus, parts of China were subject to external pressures that were close to colonialism or semi-colonialism. In such areas, what is the most effective method for separating and analyzing the activities of foreign and native capital activity?
China, a large and varied economic body, is marked by major variations by geographic region. Is it possible to obtain a national average for such an entity? For example, in the case of price indexes, if we make the urban consumer price index the representative index for Tienjin consumer price index, what adjustments do we need to make to account for urban-rural differences? Or, when estimating value added for agricultural income from farm household economic surveys, how should we adjust and use data that has inconsistent geographic coverage?
Compared to Japan, China has considerably fewer available sources in terms of both quantity and quality. With the exception of possibly public finance statistics, discovery of new sources in the near future is unlikely. Therefore, we must concentrate our efforts on how to use existing sources. At this Workshop, the materials that attracted most attention were the Agricultural and Commercial Statistics of the Bei-Yang Governments period. These statistics had previously been underused due to their reputed unreliability. However, the connections between them and the Japanese Agricultural and Commercial Statistics, and their reliability, depending on method of usage, was pointed out. The importance of looking at extant sources from new perspectives was highlighted by the Workshop.
Currently, the China Group's research has just finished the first stage of estmation, thus, is not at a point where we can assess specifics. However, after three-and-a-half years of joint research, the goal of generating national income statistics as historical data is now within sight. Ideally, we will conduct analysis based on the tentative results, and be able to integrate the results of analysis and estimations.
Prof. Minami, the China Group leader, pointed out previously that the Group was composed of a balance of veteran and younger scholars, economists and historians. Further, he noted that this project would serve as a space to train young Chinese students studying in Japan, and facilitate the production of new scholars practising quantitative analysis (Newsletter, No. 9, 1998). At this Workshop, I felt that with the addition of researchers from China and Taiwan, the space for communicating and networking regarding macro data estimations and analysis was expanding. The research of the manufacturing production statistics and the agricultural production statistics groups has benefited greatly from joint work by economists and historians, and Japanese and Chinese researchers. The research of Nankai University's Professor Wang Yuru on price index, and China Academy of Social Science's Chen Zhenping on balance of payments statistics can be readily linked up with the work of the China Group of the COE. Another noteworthy characteristic of the China Group is the close cooperation with the key national survey agency, the China National Statistics Bureau, planned for the national income estimations. Most importantly, I sensed that this type of research was spreading among young Chinese graduate students and young scholars, and that Prof. Minami's hopes were beginning to be realized. There is still a long ways to go, but the COE project cannot succeed without data on China.
In parting, I take this opportunity to express my gratitude to Prof. Minami for his leadership of the China Group's research, and to Prof. Makino who extended great effort in helping organize this Workshop. I look forward to the next gathering.
(Kyoto University, Institute for Research in Humanities)