農業・農村政策の動向と地域対応 : わが国の条件不利地域を主に(大会報告・共通論題 : 地域再編過程における協同と公共性)
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
From the much-observed most basic data of the 2005 Census of Agriculture and Forestry, the number of farm households and the trend in the area of land under cultivation, it can be seen that the farmer's crisis continues to deepen. It appears that the rate of decline in the number of farm households seems to have been stopped, but the decline in the area of land under cultivation continues to accelerate. If one examines agricultural areas on the basis of type, it is possible to see that flatland agricultural areas are weakening while more hilly areas are performing better. As background, one can raise the effect of the system of direct payment of subsidies to farmers in hilly and mountainous areas since 2000. This system is currently being watched closely as a potential trump card for regional regeneration of rural villages and communities and metropolitan areas alike, and is being positioned as a high priority policy for implementation. In particular, on the occasion of the start of the second five-year period this plan is being revised, and its character as a village activation subsidy has been strengthened. Many other new policies are also being introduced in agricultural and rural areas. While these rural communities are the target of policy, at the same time much is expected from them, and misgivings remain about the worsening of the fragility of rural communities. As the most striking form of this problem, marginal and vanished rural communities are attracting much attention. After confirming the current state of the above-mentioned agricultural and rural areas and policy trends, the case of Niigata Prefecture Itoigawa City Nechi area which has experienced many vanished rural communities is examined. In this area, along with the effective combination and active application of the many policies currently being implemented, new agricultural management organizations are arising. As a result, many areas overcame difficulties and are emerging as clear examples of the efficacy of the agricultural and rural communities policy. However, it is also true that a large quantity in subsidies was provided, and consequently the policy combines the two characters of regional support and the wary reaction of regional administration. Moreover, it is also important to know to what extent this example can be generalized. While keeping these points in mind, it is necessary to examine the workings of regions throughout the country in the future.
- 2008-04-30