Monday, February 17, 2014

Nomenclature Nationalism

Todd Crowell is author of the forthcoming The Dictionary of the Asian Language.

The Virginia state legislature in the U.S. ventured into unfamiliar foreign policy waters the other day when it passed a law that requires school text book publishers add six little words in reference to the body of water usually known as the Sea of Japan: “also known as the East Sea”.

That would seem to be a rather small bore triumph of South Korean sentiments, even though it is treated as a major victory in Seoul and a defeat for Japan, which unwisely went out of its way to try to forestall the legislation, even hinting that it might jeopardize Japanese investment in the state.

Still, it was a victory of sorts for South Korea, which, for the past twenty years, has been laboring mightily to persuade the rest of the world to use its designation for the body of water separating itself from Japan, or if not that at least to acknowledge that there are alternative designations.

Until recently the efforts have not been met with much success. In 2012 South Korea officially asked the International Hydrographic Organization to use East Sea for the Sea of Japan. It turned the request down after Washington officially advised the organization against it.

The U.S. Board of Geographic Names, which guides the government on nomenclature issues, also uses Sea of Japan alone, while China and Russia, two countries contiguous to the waters, use variations of the words Sea of Japan in their own languages.

The number of “also known as…” constructions are proliferating in Asia clogging up the prose and imposing a kind of political correctness on international publications when writing about Asian issues as journalists and other writers struggle to appear even-handed.

It is, of course, common place now to refer to the uninhabited rocks in the East China Sea, that are bringing China and Japan closer to war as Senkaku, also known as Daioyu. Never mind that the English language publications in China, such as South China Morning Post don’t bother with such even-handedness referring to them simply as the Diaoyu.

Similarly, the disputed islands in the Sea of Japan are usually described as Dokdo, also known as Takeshima, though there is, in this case, a third neutral term. The United States officially calls them the Lioncourt Rocks (named after the French vessel that “discovered” them.)

How far down this road must one take? A half a dozen countries border on the body of water commonly known in English as the South China Sea, each with its own geographic names. So must we, in total neutrality of course, write South China Sea – also known as Nan Hai (Chinese), Bien Dong (Vietnamese) or the West Philippine Sea?

Manila was perfectly content to refer to the waters as the South Sea, until ownership of several atolls became objects of dispute. Beginning in 2012 it decided to call the waters the West Philippine Sea to reinforce its claims to these atolls and islands. The ocean to the east of the Philippines is still known simply as the Philippine Sea.

Many publications now refer to the Southeast Asian country as Myanmar, also known as Burma. Both words approximate what Burmese call their country, but Myanmar has an unsavory pedigree. In 1989 the military junta known as the State Law and Order Council (SLORC) decreed that Burma was a colonial- era name and that henceforth it would like to be called Myanmar.

Coming only a year after bloody suppression of pro-democracy protests in Rangoon (also known as Yangon), there were grounds to question the legitimacy of the name change. The SLORC has pasted into history and Myanmar has gained acceptance almost everywhere except significantly the U.S. State Department and among some dissident publications based in Thailand.  

A similar situation arose in India when the Shiv Sena, an unsavory, right-wing nationalist party, won control of Maharashita State and declared the name of its capital, Bombay, was also a colonial relic and that henceforth it would be known as Mumbai. The Shiv Sena are long out of power but Mumbai has out-grown its origins and gained international acceptance - along with Chennia (Madras) and Kolkata (Calcutta).

One should probably be grateful that other Asian countries haven’t yet joined the nationalist nomenclature bandwagon to dump “colonial era” names. The Thais don’t insist that we call their capital city Krungthep instead of Bangkok. Beijing doesn’t insist that we exchange historic name China for the tongue twister Zhonggou, and Tokyo doesn’t insist we use Nippon – also known as Japan.



Wednesday, February 05, 2014

Abenomics' Losers

TOKYO - Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s new economic policy, dubbed “Abenomics”, has generally been considered a success in the first year in which it was implemented. But, as in other endeavors, there are winners and losers. The winners, so far, are Japan’s big exporters that have benefitted from the weakening yen, which has lost about 20 percent of its value against the dollar in the past year.

Even such trouble-prone electronics companies as Sony have been able to eke out a small profit due to the yen’s devaluation. People who have invested in stocks have also scored. But there are losers, and one of them is conveyor belt sushi, which ironically was one of the few Japanese industries that thrived during Japan’s decades-long period of stagnation and deflation.

So far, relatively little of the economic benefits of Abenomics have trickled down to the average working man, and thus industries, like revolving sushi, that are dependent on consumers are suffering in the wake of flat demand and the soaring costs of imported ingredients due to the weakening yen and increasing global competition for fish.

In a conveyor belt restaurant the customer sits at a brightly lit counter as the sushi glides by, two pieces of fish on rice to a plate. No words are necessary. You see what you like and reach out and grab it. You pay based on the number of plates that you accumulate.

Conveyor belt sushi was actually invented in 1958 by Yoshiake Shiraishi (Ironically the same year that another great Japanese food innovator, Ando Momofuko, invented instant ramen noodles). Supposedly he got the inspiration for moveable belts of sushi by watching beer bottles moving on a conveyor belt at a brewery. It was introduced to the world at the 1970 Osaka World’s Fair.

However, it really got started in the 1990s and beyond. At first it was seen as a kind of gimmick. How could it compete with established sushi restaurants (which often charged $100 or more for a sushi meal?) It was like McDonald’s competing with a Kansas City steakhouse. But before long they were responsible for a third of all sushi sales in Japan.

It fit in with the times. The extravagant years of the Bubble Economy, which ended in a crash in 1989, had given way to the more frugal times. Diners tightened spending, patronage of regular restaurants slumped, bankruptcies in the food trade exploded. The conveyor-belt sushi shops were a good deal in the times. They charged only about 100 yen (about a dollar) per plate.

But the profit margin of about 5 yen (5 cents) per plate is very slim, and the revolving sushi restaurants are being squeezed more and more. All sushi establishments rely heavily on imported ingredients, which makes their business extremely suseptical to the weakening yen and increasing competition for fish abroad. Imported ingredient costs account for about 70 per cent of the cost of running a sushi shop, more than other restaurants, like noodle shops, which can more easily source ingredients at in Japan.

For example, the wholesale price for Norwegian salmon, the most popular, ingredient in the chain restaurants, have risen by nearly 50 percent in recent years; The whitefish shrimp from Southeast Asia also costs about 40 percent more. Increasingly, the chain owners scour the world for fish, even in danger zones as off the Somali coast or new markets such as Myanmar.

Being heavily dependent on consumers and sensitive to state of the economy the conveyor belt sushi business faces another hurdle in a few months when the national sales tax goes from 5 per cent to 8 per cent in April and 10 percent in 2015. Many in Japan worry that the imposition of this consumer tax might thrust Japan back into a recession, even if only of short duration.

The revolving sushi market is also nearing saturation. The big five companies now have about 4,000 outlets in Japan, mostly in the suburbs. But patronage has been declining at all of them, including the onetime market leader, Akindo Sushiro and the third-ranked Kura.

The industry is fighting back through many tried and true methods, such as cutting prices to lure customers back into the restaurants. One of the larger chains, Kappa Create has experimented with lowering prices to 88 yen per plate on week days. While it may have attracted customers, it didn’t do much for the bottom line. Kappa reported losing Y2.2 billion in 2012.

Another sign of shakeup in a troubled industry is a trend toward mergers and consolidation among the handful of Japanese companies that own sushi restaurants. Recently, Kappa Create, operator of the Kappa Sushi chain and the second largest player in the market, acquired the fifth-ranked Genki Sushi, aiming for economies of scale. A European investor group also bought into industry leader Akindo Sushiro.

The chains are also innovating, experimenting with new ways to gauge consumer preferences and using touch panels for ordering in a continuing quest to reduce the number of hands involved. Of course, no waiters are needed for conveyor belt sushi but Kura has gone father by eliminating the need even for the restaurant manager, running the restaurant remotely. Robots cook and mold the rice.

They are also taking fast food technology to new heights. Unlike other fast-foot restaurants, which eliminate crockery, the revolving sushi shops still have to collect plates, count and wash them. Some new Kura restaurants have customers place the plates in a kind of side picket that automatically tabulates and washes the dishes.

But what the industry needs more than anything is for Abenomics to succeed. More than many other industries in Japan the revolving sushi industry is betting that the fruits of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s experiment ultimately trickle down to ordinary Japanese in the form of higher wages and that they will spend more money on going out to eat.