Japanese culture has the characteristics of a feudal society, in that it is centralised around group cohesion, interdependency and informal social control. Homogeneity and collective consciousness replace the individualism and self expression of U.S culture. Socialisation of children occurs at an early age, focusing on group accomplishments and the values of belonging to a group that will bring enduring and affecting satisfaction. These lay the foundations for a future web of social control and ensure its effectiveness as a tool for crime control. It incorporates relativistic belief systems as the moral code is dependent upon the context which one finds oneself (Reichel, 2008). This has prompted Komiya(1999) to identify Japanese culture as dualistic in nature with two contrasting norms: Uchi and Yoso. Yoso consists of interaction with strangers and is not important in this comparative analysis as the uchi membership is so strong, it prevents unlawful actions within both worlds.
Uchi means home and is characterised by its strong interdependence. It consists of families and work colleagues, or schoolmates and traditional values and duties to one another remain at all times. It is a heterogeneous membership so common values cannot provide the basis for group stability. The complicated interaction between individuals with conflicting attributes can cause tension so confrontation is avoided at all costs. Disputes within the uchi are resolved within the uchi and strict rules of conduct are necessary to ensure appropriate behaviour. The strong informal control of the uchi is reciprocated with lasting emotional support from the group as each member has an emotional commitment to every other. Self control is a necessary skill for survival as those who commit a crime jeopardise their membership within, which can result in drastic consequences. It is the strong repressive laws within the uchi, that all integrated citizens of Japan are a part of and ensures low level of crime. The Japanese do not have individual freedom from the uchi as they require it for security, and group solidarity is so strong that mixing in other groups will be seen as a betrayal. They have a harmonious existence without mixing. This is almost a direct opposite of U.S culture, where individuals can enjoy freedom and self reliance and individualism is encouraged. Citizens pick their own groups based on similarities and friendship and not locality, which is not the case in Japanese culture where the groups are tailored around constraint and conformity. It is this group mentality that acts as a deterrent for crime and is essential in keeping Japan’s crime rates low (Komiya,1999).
Informal social control is effective as people are scared of exile from the uchi. The U.S however celebrates an individual mentality and is more selfish in nature. Informal controls are not effective as children are not socialised to understand the importance of a collective consciousness and people are more concerned about themselves than the good of their groups. Exile from one group is not as extreme in American culture as groups are interchangeable and mix without any conflict. Informal control is not sufficient enough to deter crime, even in the ‘harmonious East’, an effective CJS is also necessary. Japanese CJS consists of highly structured legal codes and takes inspiration from European systems during the Meiji Era. What distinguishes it from America and other Western societies is the determination to maintain the ‘spirit of Japan’ (Hamai and Ellis, 2008). This limits liberalism and the democracies of Western societies and ensures citizens are kept intact. It is culture that has a greater impact on low crime rates than effective judicial systems as will be demonstrated below in a discussion of the police force and reintegrative shaming.
Japanese police must complete degrees before even being considered for the force. Extensive stringent tests and field experience follows with continual training throughout their careers. This is in contrast with America, where anyone from the street can apply and attend a police Academy for one year’s training. The function of the Koban, according to Hirota (1997) is in administrative service which helps with directions, lost and found and counselling; immediate incident response with arresting and victim care, before handing over to investigators; and finally in crime prevention. They are worldly known for their effectiveness in fighting crime and keeping rates low and the streets in moral order. They are obligated to not only fight crime but maintain order with a strong emphasis on community policing, but there are questions over whether the Japanese police have been idealised as a utopian force when they are not responsible for the dramatically low crime rates (Bayley, 1991). Japanese police are able to perform so effectively because of their harmonious way of life and American police would be able to do just as good a job if their culture was as spiritual as Japan’s (Bayley, 1991) Increasing urbanisation in recent years have produced a shift in culture and enhanced anonymity in Japan. Social mobility has developed and changing family and work arrangements have jeopardised the uchi, reducing the effectiveness of preventing and detecting crime (Aldous and Leishman, 2000). This is reflected in current rates and has caused the National Police Agency to release a number of statements providing reasons for amplified rates. They blamed citizens concerns for individual privacy and the demise of communitarian bonds in complicating the maintenance of close relationships (cited in Aldous and Leishman, 2000. P. 8). This is open support for the culture argument, as without a strong collective consciousness, the police would be ineffective and would not work in individualised western cultures such as America. It is not the Koban that use revolutionary tactics to deter crime, but the cultural situation in which they are located that ensures low rates. This is not to suggest that a monkey could perform their tasks! Their outstanding relations with the community are something to be desired and a concept lost in the American police force. The community do not resent the close contact and constant appearances. In fact they find solace in their presence (Damner and Fairchild, 2006), which is more than can be said in the U.S and the increasing gun fights between citizens and the police. It still cannot be ignored though, that without the strong cultural influence, citizens would not be so inclined to the communitarian ways of thinking.
Reintegrative shaming is a fundamental tool used by the Japanese within their CJS and assumes consensus within the society. In the incident of non compliance, the individual will be shamed through communal disapproval and will go through two ceremonies of repentance and reacceptance.
“cultural commitments to shaming are the key to controlling all types of crime. However...shaming runs the risk of counter productivity when it shades into stigmatisation”
(Braithwaite, 1989. P. 55)
Reintegrative shaming acts a deterrence for the offender and for any future offenders, as the shame and rejection felt by the actor acts as a deterrent and is stronger than the punishment itself. This is a more effective means of deterring crime than the punitive measures in America that relies on punishment and not prevention. (Braithwaite, 1989) Japan is committed to communitarianism and the importance of repenting for sinful actions and the centralisation of family in the culture ensures its success without the loss of respect. Concentration is placed on the act and not the actor and the individual is given the opportunity to repent. In the U.S the actor is punished for unlawful actions with fines, community service or incarceration. The decline of informal structures within the U.S has resulted in the diminishment of their sanctioning capacities, and as Braithwaite (1989) argues interdependency is essential in the execution of reintegrative shaming. The success of reintegrative shaming is evident in Japan’s low crime rates, but it cannot be ignored that the strategy relies on communitarianism. It is evident that culture plays a huge role in its success. It would not enjoy the same success in the U.S because of the heterogeneous nature of its culture and this highlights the social construction of crime. Shaming helps to build on the collective consciousness and ensure its maintenance but is not the governing factor. Without the strong culture apparent in Japan, it wouldn’t stand a chance.
It has been imperative to utilise comparative criminology to evaluate the apparent success of Japan as a low level crime nation against America’s apparent failure. However, there are problems in this type of strategy (Reichel, 2008). Differences in social, economic and political context between societies will affect the comparison. The economies in Japan and America have similarities, but the social and political context differ dramatically and this will have a greater affect on the crime rates than policy alone. Not only this, but statistical evidence can be misleading. It is essential before analysis to ensure the data is defined, reported and recorded in a similar manner, but this is not always the case (Hamai and Ellis, 2008). Differences in legal definitions will result in a comparison of statistics of different acts. For example, definitions of homicide in Japan do not include burglary-homicide, but they do in America (Hamai and Ellis, 2008). Taking this into account throws new light on the dramatic difference in homicide rates between the two countries. There is also an issue of underreporting of crimes to police. Japan has no victimisation survey resulting in the only figures of crime being those that are reported to police. Japanese culture strongly influences individuals to solve crimes informally, within the uchi, without any judicial action. These crimes will not be counted in the figures
This essay identifies three key factors in Japans low crime rates: The Koban; Reintegrative shaming and culture. Whilst the success depends on all of these features, culture plays the central role. Japanese and American cultures contrast so extremely that different strategies must be implicated in the fight against crime. Japan has integrated a number of theories, strategies and European legality and really come up trumps! It is however all reliant on culture and increasing industrialisation and a move from a collective consciousness threatens to jeopardise the success that they have enjoyed for so long. After this is all considered, statistical validity throws a worrying shadow on Japans crime rates and a dark reality of crime could be lurking under the surface. However the extremity of the difference in rates between the two countries suggests that even after validity is considered, it is still apparent that Japan is more successful at deterring crime than the U.S.
References
Aldous, C and Leishman, F (2000) Enigma Variations: Reassessing the Koban. Nissan Occassional Paper Series 31
Bayley, D.H(1991) Forces of Order: Policing Modern Japan. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Braithwaite, J (1989) Crime shame and reintegration. New York: Cambridge University Press
Damner, H.R and Fairchild, E (2006) Comparative Criminal Justice Systems. 3rd ed. Canada: Wadsworth
Garland, D (2000) The culture of high crime societies. British Journal of Criminology 40(3) p.347-375
Hamai,K and Ellis,T (2008) Japanese Criminal Justice: Was reintegrative shaming a chimera? Punishment and Society 10(1) p.25
Hirota (1997) A day in the life of a Tokyo police officer, In Global Report on Crime and Justice (1999).
Komiya (1999) A cultural study of the low crime rate in Japan. British journal of Criminology. 39(3)
Reichel, P.L (2008) Comparative criminal justice systems: A topical approach. 5th eds. New Jersey: Pearson
White paper on crime (2003) Research and training institute (2004) Tokyo: Ministry of Justice from accessed 11th may
