TOKYO - Competition is intensifying among regional areas in Japan to become a "second capital," despite a new law lacking specifics on what it takes to back up Tokyo as an administrative hub, while scholars warn that political considerations could undermine a fair selection process.
The backup capital push is a key pillar of the ruling coalition agreement between Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's Liberal Democratic Party and the Osaka-based Japan Innovation Party, but the law enacted in a rush in the previous parliamentary session has drawn criticism that it only favors the western Japan city.
Key conditions for a fair race are greater transparency in the selection criteria and process, and a clearer definition of what is expected of a second capital, including whether it is intended primarily to strengthen the government's backup functions or serve as a new regional economic center, experts say.
"In theory, a fair selection process that is not predetermined in Osaka's favor is possible, depending on how the system will be designed," said Akifumi Shimada, a professor at Kyushu University's Graduate School of Law in Fukuoka, southwestern Japan.
"Still, the legislation has been politically tied very closely to the 'Osaka metropolis plan' and political dynamics are already at play, making such a fair process difficult in reality," he said.
To ensure fairness, Shimada also said the government should disclose proposals by candidate regions along with the review process and results and entrust the screening to independent third-party bodies.
Enacted on July 24, the ruling camp-sponsored legislation allows the prime minister to designate a backup capital based on applications from prefectures that meet certain requirements such as population and economic size.
The law will take effect by the end of October, with the government set to decide on specific requirements to become a backup capital. One or more capitals could be selected as long as they are unlikely to be hit by the same disasters as Tokyo, and they would receive tax incentives.
For years, the JIP, also known as Nippon Ishin, has been advocating its pet project, the Osaka metropolis plan to reorganize the city like Tokyo while streamlining administrative functions and decentralizing power from the capital.
Its previous attempts to realize the initiative failed twice after referendums held in 2015 and 2020, which were narrowly rejected and opposed by the LDP before Takaichi took the helm.
JIP leader Hirofumi Yoshimura, who also serves as Osaka governor, has said he intends to hold a third referendum alongside the next gubernatorial election next spring, in an apparent effort to translate his popularity into public support for the metropolis plan.
Takaichi pushed ahead with the second capital idea, following through on the agreement with the JIP, which came to her aid and helped her win parliamentary approval to become prime minister last October.
Despite uncertainty over the selection process, several prefectures that are home to regional core cities, including Fukuoka, Hokkaido and Hiroshima, have already expressed interest in seeking the designation.
However, the regional governments considering bids differ in how they define the purpose of the second-capital initiative.
Aichi Gov. Hideaki Omura is promoting the prefecture, home to auto giant Toyota Motor Corp., as "Japan's engine of economic growth and overwhelming center of industrial concentration."
Gunma Gov. Ichita Yamamoto, meanwhile, argues that his prefecture, northwest of Tokyo, is well suited for the role as it is less prone to natural disasters and enjoys convenient access to the capital, allowing it to serve as a "backup base" to support Tokyo's "restoration and recovery" in case of emergencies.
Yoshimura has also argued that Osaka can strengthen Japan by serving both as a backup for Tokyo and driver of growth through a more decentralized economic structure.
Shimada said the second-capital scheme is based on "at least two different rationales" -- establishing a backup center for Tokyo in the event of disasters and fostering a major metropolitan area outside Tokyo as a new engine of economic growth.
While the two objectives overlap in some respects, they differ fundamentally in purpose and should be evaluated using different criteria, he said, arguing that the pursuit of both under a single framework is "the biggest problem" with the new law.
Kentaro Kanasaki, a professor at Mukogawa Women's University in Hyogo Prefecture, near Osaka, expressed similar views.
"The best location for backup government functions may not necessarily be the same place that is best suited to serve as a major industrial and economic center," he said.
Meanwhile, Kanasaki said that if the central government defines decent standards and encourages healthy competition among local governments, it could ultimately help benefit the whole nation.
"Given the frequency of natural disasters in Japan, the concept of a second capital itself has a certain rationale," he said.
Still, both public administration scholars warned that the legislation could widen disparities between the regions that are designated and those that are not, raising the risk that Japan's excessive concentration in Tokyo would merely shift to a "a few centers of concentration."
Kanasaki said the legislation was enacted without sufficient public debate over what a second capital should be and that Japan now needs a broader national discussion about "what kind of national land structure it should pursue in the future."
