Do the Japanese really love nature more than all other people ?

[Kinsao]

Hmm - I have been following this discussion with interest, although a lot of the points about language escaped me because my knowledge of Japanese isn't good enough to follow them.

It seems to me that Maciamo is making 2 main points to argue that the Japanese do not particularly "love nature" more than other nations (not to say that they love it any less, but merely not more):

1. The language contains fewer separate/non-compound words for different species/sub-species of animals, and the classifications are less accurate than in many European languages - implying that historically-speaking (i.e. while the language was in development) the Japanese people in general did not have sufficient interest in and/or love of nature to classify animal and plant species as accurately as Europeans did.

2. Proportionately fewer Japanese people visit countryside parks in their spare time.

Well, I can't speak about the development of language, since I know nothing about it. Languages are very complicated in the way they develop (hence the other thread for this). Certainly, it seems logical that nations/races would develop the most extensive vocabulary in areas that are of particular use to them (and hence of particular interest) - whether that be hunting, fishing, agriculture, snow, whatever.

It could be that it is rather an issue of "inaccurate" language, and a generally more haphazard approach to classification of species, rather than a disinterest. This could be more connected to the development of the Japanese language rather than their relationship to the natural world - but as I've said, I don't know enough about the language and its history, so that's just one possible hypothesis. So I will leave that point alone.

The proportion of people visiting countryside parks and such... Hmm, I wonder, what would be the reason for a lower proportion? Of course, obviously one reason would be that fewer people are interested in nature, in the sense of going outside and experiencing it. But what could be the reason for this? I wonder if it is linked at all to upbringing and education. For instance, if the government doesn't think it's worthwhile for schools to teach much about the natural world, people would be much more inclined to grow up without much knowledge about "nature" (I see this happening in my own generation in the UK, sadly). So partly it's not that people have some kind of "inherent" disinterest, but rather that an interest is not awakened in them, either by teachers at school or handed on by their parents.

Of course, that implies a deep-seated "culture of disinterest", and makes me ask even more questions.

I find it hard to believe that the Japanese as a nation have always had a disinterest in the natural world, because like every other nation, this is essential for survival and to get strong and prosperous, and an involvement with "nature" can only actually be dropped when a nation has reached a certain stage of social and technological advancement that allows people to live their lives at something of a remove from nature - e.g., don't have to harvest and/or kill their own food any more, have substantial and reliable protection from adverse weather conditions, and other things like that. Japan is, of course, well technologically-advanced and in fact is well-known for being pretty up at front these days when it comes to such things. But it wasn't always the case. It is a country that has developed very fast in a relatively short space of time. So my little theorylet says that perhaps in some respects Japan and its people are in a kind of "honeymoon period" with technology. It's new, and it's great, and it could be that in this particular time of Japan's history, there is a keenness for "in with the new" and a consequent lowering of interest in the timeless background to life that is "nature".

On the other hand, that could just be me blethering complete and utter rubbish.

I tend to feel that Japanese people in general have neither more nor less love of nature than any other nation. I also think that, at least at the present time, their appreciation tends to be more "aesthetic" rather than "analytical". For example, I'm sure that Japanese people are as likely as anyone else to enjoy the shape and scent of a beautiful flower, appreciate an impressive mountain range, take photos of trees, enjoy the sound of a waterfall or the song of a bird, etc. etc., even without the precision of language to describe species or the education and encouragement to actively seek out such things.

When it comes down to it, I suppose it also depends largely on whether you're discussing the Japanese "psyche" or the Japanese "culture", which are of course inter-related but not the same thing! (IMO while "cultures" are widely different around the world, "psyche" is not so different.)

Another factor in proportion of people visiting countryside parks is about how easy it is for people to get to them. What proportion of the Japanese population lives in cities/urban areas? I imagine it's pretty high although I don't know the figures. I also imagine (although have no idea whether I'm right! :/) that transport links are pretty good, but it could also be costly. Ease and speed of access is a factor in things like that. It might seem a bit way-out to those of you who own cars and/or earn plenty, but I assure you that here in the UK I know a fair number of people who rarely, if ever, visit the countryside, not because they have no interest in it, but simply because, "stuck" in the city, they have not the time and/or money for a visit to be worth their while. I know the UK is not Japan (!) but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if this situation wasn't reflected to some extent in Japan, especially considering all that I've heard about the long working hours expected in Japan.

[Maciamo]

Hmm - I have been following this discussion with interest, although a lot of the points about language escaped me because my knowledge of Japanese isn't good enough to follow them.
It seems to me that Maciamo is making 2 main points to argue that the Japanese do not particularly "love nature" more than other nations (not to say that they love it any less, but merely not more):

Yes, that is pretty much it. You are one of the few people in this discussion who actually managed to understand what I wrote.

However, there aren't only two main points in my argumentation, but 12, as you will see if you go back to the first post in this thread and check at the bottom the 13 reasons that I have added later to summarise my thoughts. We have discussed a lot about language and parks so far, but I consider these 2 points to be the weakest of my 13 arguments. In fact I didn't even mention that the Japanese visit less often countryside parks, because I do not have verificable data on this (but I do for the percentage of houses with garden).

The strongest arguments that make me think that the Japanese do not cherish nature more than Westerners (and probably less) are : the relative lack of houses with garden, the little number of botanical and zoological gardens, the little number of nature documentaries on the main TV channels, the absence of elected Green Party, and the near absence of vegetarianism. These are all provable facts. The whaling policy doesn't concern the whole population (although a higher percentage of Japanese than Westerners support whaling, polls have shown), and government-sponsored destruction reveals more about the people working for the government than the general population.

[craftsman]

The strongest arguments that make me think that the Japanese do not cherish nature more than Westerners (and probably less) are : the relative lack of houses with garden, the little number of botanical and zoological gardens, the little number of nature documentaries on the main TV channels, the absence of elected Green Party, and the near absence of vegetarianism. These are all provable facts.

You mentioned you had some figures for the houses with gardens. I had a quick look and couldn't see them in the posts. It would be interesting to see them. If I missed them perhaps you could point me in the right direction. Also it would be useful to see the number of zoos and botanical gardens in Japan and the figures on vegetarianism, if possible.


Another thing that would be useful to see is your figures for the number of nature shows on Japanese TV. I saw your post about the French speaking channels and nature programmes but unless there is a comparison with Japanese TV, it holds less value in the argument. I had a look but things have moved around a bit recently, so if I missed it, my apologies.

Lastly, I'm not totally convinced of the strength of 'the absence of an elected Green Party' as one of your arguments. You even mention yourself that the same could be said of the US and other European countries. An elected Green party says more about the political and state funding system in the country than it does about normal everyday people's likes or dislikes.

[Maciamo]

You mentioned you had some figures for the houses with gardens. I had a quick look and couldn't see them in the posts. It would be interesting to see them. If I missed them perhaps you could point me in the right direction.

I found that when I was in Japan. I am pretty sure it was somewhere here, but I cannot find the right table anymore. Anyway, how many houses with garden/yard have you seen in Tokyo ? Personally, none.

Also it would be useful to see the number of zoos and botanical gardens in Japan and the figures on vegetarianism, if possible.

Phew. Do you think I can find all the links like that. Why don't you look and try to confirm or deny my claims. Here is a list of botanical gardens in Japan. Feel free to compare the number and size with Western countries, and make the per capita ratio. The only botanic garden in Tokyo (23 wards) is Koishikawa Shokubutsuen (the one of Tokyo University). It is ridiculously tiny (16 ha) and only has 4,000 species of plants. There are two botanic gardens in Brussels, the biggest of which is 92 ha wide and has 18,000 species of plants (so about 5x bigger in size and variety than that of the world-famous Tokyo University).

Be it for the zoological gardens (list here), it also depends what you define as such. Japanese language does not clearly distinguish between zoos, animal parks, safari parks, bird parks, animal theme parks, and sometimes even natural/animal reserves. I have seen some of the so-called 動物園 in Japan and they do not deserve more the appellation of zoo than some farms. It's always good to compare the best a country has to offer, so as to compare the top. I have been to Ueno Zoo, which is Japan's first and most famous zoo, and it wasn't very impressive (well, it has pandas, which is partly why it is famous). It has only 422 species and 2,600 animals, against 950 species and over 5,000 animals for the Antwerp Zoo in my ridiculously tiny country (so tiny that many Japanese and Americans cannot place it on a map of Europe).

It's sad to have to compare Tokyo to Brussels, or Japan to Belgium, and still have the latter win...

As for vegetarianism, I mean by that not eating any meat (including fish and seafood), even if it is not visible (e.g. in sauce or soup). What interest us here is not to kill animals, so eggs and milk are fine, but animal fat is not, as it requires to kill the animal. Anyone who has lived or travelled in Japan knows that it is extremely hard to find Japanese food matching those criteria. My sister is a vegetarian (because she doesn't want to kill animals), and she came twice to Japan (about 3 weeks each time). We travelled through half of the country, and I can tell you that it was a p.i.t.a. to find something else than bread, pastries, pasta and Indian food for her to eat. Vegetarian Japanese food is mostly restricted to Buddhist cuisine (rare outside Kyoto), or a few dishes like soba and vegetable tempura. Anthing else has meat in it. Japan is clearly not a vegetarian-friendly country. In restaurants they were often surprised at the request to serve a dish without meat because no Japanese ever ask them (we were seen as the difficult gaijin ), while in Europe they are so used to it that most restaurant now have at least a few vegetarian dishes or will gladly cook a special dish without meat. I remember the time we asked in a "omu-rice" restaurant chain if we could have a dish without bacon mixed with the rice for my sister who is a vegetarian. The waitress asked the chef, and after 10min of "negotiation" she came back telling us that it was impossible because the chef didn't want to serve a dish that didn't taste the way he wanted. We were 4 people, and we had to leave to find another restaurant, just because they couldn't accomodate a vegetarian. We had other similar experiences elsewhere too.

Another thing that would be useful to see is your figures for the number of nature shows on Japanese TV. I saw your post about the French speaking channels and nature programmes but unless there is a comparison with Japanese TV, it holds less value in the argument.

I suppose that anybody really interested on this forum knows Japanese TV programmes... If not, I invite you to check this online TV guide. Keep me informed on your findings.

Lastly, I'm not totally convinced of the strength of 'the absence of an elected Green Party' as one of your arguments. You even mention yourself that the same could be said of the US and other European countries.

The USA is not really an example in environmental protection. They even refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol. Here is more info on Green Parties around the world. You will see that the Greens are one of the major parties at the European Parliament. There are in fact two main Green Parties, one of which is the 4th biggest at the parlaiment out of a good dozen of parties. All the Greens got 6.5% of the votes Europe-wide at the 2004 election. They are especially strong in Scandinavia, Germany and Belgium. In Belgium, for instance, the Green Party is a ruling coalition party in many levels of government (municipality, province, region, country), and even the majority party in a few municipalities.

An elected Green party says more about the political and state funding system in the country than it does about normal everyday people's likes or dislikes.

I disagree. In fact, I think there is a Green Party in Japan, but nobody has ever elected them. If it must take money and startling campaigns for people to care about nature, then it is a sign of lack of general concern by the population.

[pipokun]

The data on park per capita doesn't support the exsistance of the strange Japanese population claiming the propaganda you repeatedly mention, even caused trauma.

About the politics, just look at the our neighbors. It is sad that liberalism in Japan or Asia is still related to the red. But I also feel perplexed to see Europeans vote far-right parties and some countries have to ban them. I don't know if they are greener or not, thogh.

[Maciamo]

The data on park per capita doesn't support the exsistance of the strange Japanese population claiming the propaganda you repeatedly mention, even caused trauma.

I can't make head or tail of what you are saying. I used the term "propaganda" only in relation to "the Japanese think that they love/care about nature more than others". The data on park per capita in Tokyo (vs Brussels) indeed does not confirm that the Japanese love more nature. Is that what you wanted to say ?

About the politics, just look at the our neighbors. It is sad that liberalism in Japan or Asia is still related to the red. But I also feel perplexed to see Europeans vote far-right parties and some countries have to ban them. I don't know if they are greener or not, thogh.

I am not sure what liberalism and the far-right have anything to do with the absence of green parties. I am not going to expand in this thread on the fact that far-right parties are extremely diverse (no two parties are alike), and the term "liberal" can have very different meanings depending on the country (e.g. in Belgium it describes the reformist right, but in the USA it refers more to socialists, so the opposite of Belgium).

[pipokun]

"the Japanese think that they love/care about nature more than others".

So where can I meet the Japanese?
For your next trip to see your parents in law, I highly recommend that you should go upstream to the source of the Tama river. It must be quite an interesting short trip.

[undrentide]

Anyway, how many houses with garden/yard have you seen in Tokyo ? Personally, none.

I'm curious which part of Tokyo you were living and which parts of Tokyo you've visited... (Maybe shitamachi areas??)

[Maciamo]

I'm curious which part of Tokyo you were living and which parts of Tokyo you've visited... (Maybe shitamachi areas??)

Mostly the 23-ku (where 80% of the Tokyoites live), especially the inner wards. I know better the East Side (Taito-ku, Chuo-ku, Koto-ku, Sumida-ku, Edogawa-ku...).

[undrentide]

I know better the East Side (Taito-ku, Chuo-ku, Koto-ku, Sumida-ku, Edogawa-ku...).

Oh, that explains a lot. Thanks.