Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T00:05:38.064Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Property rights and economic development: the legacy of Japanese colonial institutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2016

DONGWOO YOO  and
RICHARD H. STECKEL
DONGWOO YOO*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA
RICHARD H. STECKEL*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
*
*Email: dongwoo.yoo@mail.wvu.edu
**Email: steckel.1@osu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Several studies link development to institutions transplanted by European colonizers and here we extend this line of research to Asia. Japan imposed its system of well-defined property rights on some of its Asian colonies. In 1939, Japan began to register private land in its island colonies, an effort that was completed in Palau but interrupted elsewhere by World War II. Within Micronesia, robust economic development followed only in Palau where individual property rights were well defined. We show that well-defined property rights in Korea and Taiwan secured land taxation and enabled farmers to obtain bank loans for irrigation systems. Considering Japanese colonies, we use the presence or absence of a land survey as an instrument to identify the causal impact of new institutions. Our estimates show that property-defining institutions were important for economic development, results that are confirmed when using a similar approach with British Colonies in Asia.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , September 2016 , pp. 623 - 650
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acemoglu, D., , S. Johnson, , and Robinson, J. (2001), ‘The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation’, The American Economic Review, 91 (5): 1369–1401.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D. and Johnson, S. (2005), ‘Unbundling Institutions’, Journal of Political Economy, 113 (5): 949–995.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., Cantoni, D., and Robinson, J. (2011), ‘The Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution’, American Economic Review, 10 (7): 3286–3307.Google Scholar
Alston, L., Libecap, G., and Mueller, B. (1999), Titles, Conflict, and Land Use: The Development of Property Rights and Land Reform on the Brazilian Amazon Frontier, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Angus-Leppan, P. and Williamson, I. (1985), ‘A Project for Upgrading the Cadastral System in Thailand’, Survey Review 28 (215): 2–14.Google Scholar
Arruñada, B. (2012), Institutional Foundations of Impersonal Exchange: Theory and Policy of Contractual Registries, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Banerjee, A. and Iyer, L. (2005), ‘History, Institutions, and Economic Performance: The Legacy of Colonial Land Tenure Systems in India’, The American Economic Review, 95 (4): 1190–1213.Google Scholar
Besley, T. and Ghatak, M. (2008), ‘Creating collateral: The de Soto effect and the political economy of legal reform’ Working Paper.Google Scholar
Besley, T. and Persson, T. (2009), ‘The Origins of State Capacity: Property Rights, Taxation, and Politics’, American Economic Review 99 (4): 1218–44.Google Scholar
Boecker, R. (1993), Yap State History, Yap State Department of Education.Google Scholar
Boucher, S., Barham, B., and Carter, M. (2005), ‘The Impact of “Market-Friendly” Reforms on Credit and Land Markets in Honduras and Nicaragua’, World Development, 33 (1): 107–128.Google Scholar
CIA (2007), The World Factbook, Washington D.C.: CIA.Google Scholar
Cho, S. (2003), Hankuk Geundae Tojijedoui Hyungsung (in Korean), Seoul: Haenam.Google Scholar
Close Up Foundation (2000) Micronesia: A Guide Through the Centuries, Alexamdria: Close Up Foundation.Google Scholar
Damas, D. (1994), Bountiful Island: A Study of Land Tenure on a Micronesian Atoll, Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.Google Scholar
Demsetz, H. (1967), ‘Toward a Theory of Property Rights’, The American Economic Review, 57 (2): 347–359.Google Scholar
De Soto, H. (2000), The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
De Soto, H. (2001), The Mystery of Capital. Finance and Development, 38 (1): 9–11.Google Scholar
Do, Q. and Iyer, L. (2008), ‘Land Titling and Rural Transition in Vietnam’, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 56 (3): 531–579.Google Scholar
Duus, P. (1976), The Rise of Modern Japan, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Engerman, S. and Sokoloff, K. (1997), ‘Factor Endowments, Inequality, and Paths of Development among New World Economics’, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series No. 9259 October 2002.Google Scholar
Etpison, M. (2004), Palau - Cultural History, Koror: Tkel Corp.Google Scholar
Feder, G., Onchan, T., Chalamwong, Y., and Hangladoran, C. (1986), Land Policies and Farm Productivity in Thailand, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Ferguson, N. (2001), The Cash Nexus: Money and Power in the Modern World, 1700–2000, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Feyrer, J. and Sacerdote, B. (2009), ‘Colonialism and Modern Income: Islands as Natural Experiments’. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91 (2): 245–262.Google Scholar
Field, E. and Torero, M. (2004), ‘Do Property Titles Increase Credit Access among the Urban Poor? Evidence from Peru’ Working Paper.Google Scholar
Galiani, S. and Schargrodsky, E. (2012), ‘Property Rights for the Poor: Effects of Land Titling’, Journal of Public Economics, 94 (9-10): 700–729.Google Scholar
Gragert, E. (1994), Landownership under Colonial Rule: Korea's Japanese Experience, 1900–1935, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Heinsohn, G. and Steiger, O. (2013), in Decker, F. (translated and edited, all pages or 1-185), Ownership Economics: On the Foundations of Interest, Money, Markets, Business Cycles and Economic Development, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hodgson, G. (2015), Conceptualizing Capitalism: Institutions, Evolution, Future, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hong, K. and Murray, S. (2005), Looking Through Taiwan: American Anthropologists' Collusion with Ethnic Domination, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Hori, K. (1983), ‘The Growth of the Commercial Bank in Korea (in Japanese)’, Socio-economic history: shakai-keizai-shigaku, 49 (1): 29–54.Google Scholar
Japanese Colonial Government (1915), Statistics on Land Registration in Taiwan (in Chinese) Taipei: Japanese Colonial Government.Google Scholar
Ka, C. (1995), Japanese Colonialism in Taiwan: Land Tenure, Development, and Dependency, 1985–1945, Oxford: Westview.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., and Mastruzzi, M. (2007), ‘Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2007’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4654: 803– 832.Google Scholar
Kim, S. (2008), ‘Ume Kenjirō and the Making of Korean Civil Law, 1906–1910,’ The Journal of Japanese Studies, 34 (1): 1–31.Google Scholar
Kwon, T. (1989), Iljeui Chosun Chimryaksa (in Korean), Cheoan: Korean Independence Institute.Google Scholar
La Croix, S. (1995), ‘The Political Economy of Urban Land Reform in Hawaii’, Urban Studies, 32 (6): 999–1015.Google Scholar
Libecap, G. and Lueck, D. (2011), ‘The demarcation of land and the role of coordinating property institutions’, Journal of Political Economy, 119 (3): 426–467.Google Scholar
Libecap, G., Lueck, D., and O'Grady, T. (2011), ‘Large-Scale Institutional Changes: Land Demarcation in the British Empire’, Journal of Law and Economics, 54 (4): S295– S327.Google Scholar
Lin, W. (2008), ‘Land Property and contract in Taiwan: During the Qing and Japanese Colonial Period’ Working Paper.Google Scholar
McCutcheon, M. (1981), ‘Resource Exploitation and the Tenure of Land and Sea in Palau’, University of Arizona PhD Dissertation.Google Scholar
McGrath, W. and Wilson, S. (1971), ‘The Marshal, Caroline and Mariana’, in Crocombe, R. (ed.), Land Tenure in the Pacific, London: Oxford University Press pages 190–210.Google Scholar
Myers, R. and Peattie, M. (1984), Japanese Colonial Empire 1895–1945, Cambridge: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, D. and Weingast, B. (1989), ‘Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutional Governing Public Choice in Seventeenth-Century England’, The Journal of Economic History, 49 (4): 803–832.Google Scholar
Petrosian-Husa, C., Miko, M., and Smaserui, M. (2002), Inventory of Cultural and Historical Sites and Collection of Oral History Ngardmau State, Bureau of Arts and Culture - Historic Preservation Office, Republic of Palau.Google Scholar
Phang, S. (2000), ‘Hong Kong and Singapore’, Journal of Economics and Sociology, 59 (5): 337–352.Google Scholar
Purcell, D. (1968), ‘Japanese expansion in the South Pacific, 1890–1935’, University of Pennsylvania PhD Dissertation.Google Scholar
Rhee, Y. and Cho, Y. (2005), ‘18-19 Segi Nonggaui Gagye Gyesheung Chuyi (in Korean)’, Gyungje Sahak, 39: 3–25.Google Scholar
Rhee, Y., Jang, S., Miyajima, H., and Matsumoto, T. (1992), Hankuk Guendae Suri Johap Yongu (in Korean), Seoul: Iljogak.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. (1976), Land Law and Registration, London: William Clowes & Sons, Limited.Google Scholar
Slabbers, P. (1990), ‘Western and Indigenous Principles of Irrigation Water Distribution’, in Design for Sustainable Farmer Managed Irrigation Scheme in Sub-Saharan Africa.Google Scholar
SMERU Research Team (2002), ‘An Impact Evaluation of Systematic Land Titling under the Land Administration Project (LAP)’, in SMERU Research Report.Google Scholar
Sng, T. (2006), ‘Agency Problem and Dynastic Decline: The Case of Late Imperial China 1700–1850’, Northwestern University PhD Dissertation.Google Scholar
Tilly, C. (1992), Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990–1992, Cambridge: Blackwells.Google Scholar
Trust Territory of Pacific Islands (1969–1989), Trust Territory reports: containing opinions of the High Court of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, Appellate and Trial Divisions, vol. 1–6, Oxford: Equity Pub. Corp.Google Scholar
Trust Territory of Pacific Islands: Office of the High Commissioner and Dept. of the Interior United States (1971), Annual report, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands to the Secretary of the Interior.Google Scholar
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands Office of Land Management (1967), ‘Note on Duplication’.Google Scholar
Wright, C. (1947), Trust Territory Policy Letter P-1. Department of High Commissioner of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Island. Washington D.C.Google Scholar