Japan’s Upper House Election: Prolonged Instability – CSIS | Center for Strategic and International Studies

 

Report on the Japanese Upper House Election and its Implications for Sustainable Development

Executive Summary: Electoral Dynamics and Sustainable Development Goals

A recent upper house election in Japan resulted in a significant political shift, with the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and its Komeito coalition partner losing their majority in both chambers. This outcome introduces considerable political constraints and highlights voter priorities closely aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The election campaign and its results underscore public demand for progress on SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The new political landscape, characterized by a minority government, will necessitate greater cross-party collaboration to address these pressing domestic issues and maintain commitments to SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) through stable foreign policy.

Analysis of Election Results and Voter Priorities

Electoral Outcome and Political Realignment

Of the 125 contested seats in the 248-seat upper house, the election produced a fragmented result that ended the ruling coalition’s majority. The new composition presents challenges for governance and policy implementation.

• The LDP-Komeito ruling coalition secured 47 of the contested seats, bringing their total to 122, short of a majority.
• The Democratic Party for the People (DPFP) made significant gains, winning 17 seats and increasing its total to 22, reflecting its appeal to younger voters with policies aimed at economic improvement.
• Other smaller parties, including Sanseito and the Conservative Party of Japan, also gained seats, indicating a diversification of the political landscape.
• The main opposition, the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (CDPJ), saw limited gains, failing to fully capitalize on voter dissatisfaction with the incumbent government.

Voter Concerns Aligned with Sustainable Development Goals

The election was dominated by domestic issues, with voter turnout surging to 58.5 percent. This increased public engagement signals a strong demand for government action on key socio-economic challenges that are central to the SDGs.

1. Economic Well-being (SDG 8 & SDG 1): Inflation and general economic precarity were the primary concerns, highlighting the public’s focus on achieving stable economic growth and reducing poverty.
2. Social Protection and Reduced Inequalities (SDG 10): Concerns over social security and pensions were prominent, reflecting a demand for robust social safety nets that reduce inequality and support vulnerable populations.
3. Accountable Institutions (SDG 16): The high voter turnout, including a record number of early votes, demonstrates active civic participation in democratic processes, a cornerstone of SDG 16.

Factors Influencing the Ruling Coalition’s Setback

Economic Policies and their Impact on SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 8 (Decent Work)

The government’s inability to effectively address economic frustrations was a critical factor. Policy proposals from the ruling coalition failed to align with public preferences for achieving economic security and reducing poverty, as targeted by SDG 1 and SDG 8. A proposed one-time cash handout received only 17.9 percent support, whereas an opposition-backed proposal for a consumption tax cut garnered 76.7 percent approval, indicating a public desire for more systemic economic relief.

Erosion of Institutional Trust and Accountability (SDG 16)

A political funds scandal continued to undermine public trust in government, directly impacting the principles of transparent and accountable institutions central to SDG 16. A survey indicated that over half of respondents considered the scandal a factor in their vote. Despite reforms, the lingering effects of the scandal weakened support for the LDP and underscored the electorate’s demand for integrity in public life.

Shifting Demographics and the Call for Inclusive Politics (SDG 10)

The election results reflect a longer-term trend of shifting voter allegiances and a call for more inclusive political representation, in line with the aims of SDG 10. The LDP’s weakening grip on its traditional conservative base, combined with the rise of parties like Sanseito and the DPFP, suggests a growing demand for alternatives to the political establishment. These parties successfully appealed to voters, including younger demographics, who felt their concerns were unaddressed. Concurrently, the struggles of Komeito point to the declining influence of its aging support base, signaling deeper structural changes in the electorate toward new forms of political mobilization.

Future Policy Outlook and Governance Challenges

Navigating a Minority Government to Advance the National Agenda

Prime Minister Ishiba intends to lead a minority government, which will require unprecedented efforts to build consensus for policy-making. Advancing legislation, including a supplemental budget aimed at economic stimulus (SDG 8), will depend on case-by-case cooperation with opposition parties. This political reality could either lead to gridlock or foster a more durable framework for cross-party governance, which is essential for building the effective and inclusive institutions envisioned in SDG 16.

Implications for Global Partnerships and Foreign Policy (SDG 17)

The domestic political situation is likely to demand the government’s primary focus, potentially limiting its capacity to engage in international affairs. This could affect Japan’s ability to contribute to SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) on a global scale.

• Trade and Economic Partnerships: Ongoing trade negotiations with the United States may be complicated by internal political divisions, potentially slowing progress on crucial economic partnerships.
• Regional Peace and Security: While a broad consensus exists among policymakers on the importance of the U.S.-Japan alliance and increased defense spending to address regional challenges, domestic political constraints may slow the implementation of these key foreign policy objectives.

In summary, while Japan’s fundamental strategic trajectory is expected to remain stable, the pace and flexibility of its foreign policy implementation may be adversely affected by the new domestic political complexity.

Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 1: No Poverty

• The article discusses government proposals aimed at alleviating economic hardship, specifically mentioning a “¥20,000 ($135) cash handout” intended for “low-income households,” which directly relates to poverty reduction measures.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

• The article highlights public frustration over “rising prices, particularly for staples like rice.” This connects to SDG 2 by addressing the issue of food affordability and access, which is a component of food security.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

• The election campaign’s focus on “domestic economic issues” is central to the article. Key concerns like “Inflation,” “general concerns about the economy,” proposed “increases in take-home pay,” and debates over a “consumption tax cut” all fall under the purview of promoting sustainable economic growth and policies that affect employment and income.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• This goal is addressed through proposed fiscal policies, such as the cash handout for “low-income households” and “children under the age of 18,” which are designed to reduce economic inequality. Furthermore, the discussion of voter dissatisfaction, the rise of opposition parties, and the weakening of the ruling party’s traditional base points to shifts in political inclusion and representation.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• This is a primary theme of the article. It covers the democratic process of an “upper house election,” the functioning of political institutions like the “Diet,” and the relationship between the “ruling coalition” and “opposition groups.” It explicitly mentions issues that undermine institutions, such as a “political funds scandal” that “undermine trust in government,” and discusses indicators of public participation like “Voter turnout.”

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

• The article touches on international cooperation and partnerships, specifically mentioning “ongoing trade negotiations with the United States” and the importance of “strong U.S.-Japan relations to meet the challenges posed by China, North Korea, and Russia.” It also notes the policy of “increasing defense spending,” which is framed within the context of international security partnerships.

What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

SDG 1: No Poverty

1. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
• The proposed “¥20,000 ($135) cash handout” for “low-income households” is a direct example of a social protection measure intended to support the vulnerable, aligning with this target.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

1. Target 2.c: Adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning of food commodity markets and their derivatives and facilitate timely access to market information, including on food reserves, in order to help limit extreme food price volatility.
• The article identifies “public frustration over the economy and rising prices, particularly for staples like rice” as a key political issue. This highlights the problem of food price volatility that Target 2.c aims to address.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

1. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
• The high voter turnout and the success of smaller opposition parties like the “Democratic Party for the People (DPFP)” and “Sanseito” reflect a shift in political engagement and the rise of voices seeking an alternative to the traditional parties, indicating a change in political inclusion.
2. Target 10.4: Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality.
• The debate between the ruling coalition’s proposed “cash handout” and the opposition’s push for a “consumption tax cut” represents a direct engagement with fiscal and social protection policies aimed at addressing economic inequality.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

1. Target 16.5: Substantially reduce corruption and bribery in all their forms.
• The article explicitly points to the LDP’s “2024 political funds scandal” as an issue that continues to “undermine trust in government” and was a factor for “over half of respondents” in their vote, directly relating to the problem of corruption in political institutions.
2. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
• The entire article analyzes the effectiveness and accountability of Japan’s government following an election. The LDP’s loss of a majority, forcing it to “make even greater efforts to reach out to opposition parties,” is a development that will reshape the accountability and transparency of the policymaking process.
3. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
• The “notably high” voter turnout of “58.5 percent” is a direct measure of participation. The election results, which saw the ruling coalition lose its majority and smaller parties make “notable gains,” reflect a shift in representative decision-making, forcing the government to be more responsive to a wider range of voter concerns.

Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

For SDG 1 & 10 (Poverty & Inequality)

• Policy Proposal: A “¥20,000 ($135) cash handout” for low-income households and children.
• Public Support for Policy: The proposed handout “failed to resonate,” with only “17.9 percent support.” In contrast, an alternative policy, a “consumption tax cut,” had “76.7 percent public support.” These percentages act as indicators of public perception of the effectiveness of different social and fiscal policies.

For SDG 2 (Zero Hunger)

• Price Volatility Indicator: The mention of “rising prices, particularly for staples like rice” serves as a qualitative indicator of food price volatility and its impact on the population.

For SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

• Voter Participation: “Voter turnout was notably high at 58.5 percent, up 6.5 points from the 2022 upper house election.”
• Perception of Corruption: A survey finding that “over half of respondents cited [the political funds scandal] as a factor in their vote” is an indicator of the perceived impact of corruption on democratic processes.
• Trust in Institutions: The article notes that the scandal continues to “undermine trust in government,” a key qualitative indicator of institutional health.
• Institutional Representation: The election results, such as “The LDP won 39 seats,” the ruling coalition falling “short of a majority,” and the DPFP increasing its total to “22 seats,” are quantitative indicators of the composition and representativeness of the upper house.

For SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)

• Commitment to International Norms: The policy of “increasing defense spending to two percent of GDP by 2027” is a specific, measurable indicator of commitment to international security partnerships and norms.
• Trade Policy Engagement: The reference to “ongoing trade negotiations with the United States” is an indicator of active engagement in the international trading system.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

SDGs	Targets	Indicators Identified in the Article
SDG 1: No Poverty	1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems.	Proposed “¥20,000 ($135) cash handout” for low-income households.
SDG 2: Zero Hunger	2.c: Adopt measures to… limit extreme food price volatility.	Public frustration over “rising prices, particularly for staples like rice.”
SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities	10.4: Adopt policies, especially fiscal… and social protection policies.	Debate over a cash handout (17.9% support) versus a consumption tax cut (76.7% support).
SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions	16.5: Substantially reduce corruption. 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions. 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making.	– “Political funds scandal” cited by “over half of respondents” as a factor in their vote. – Scandal continues to “undermine trust in government.” – “Voter turnout was notably high at 58.5 percent.” – Election results showing the ruling coalition lost its majority, requiring cooperation with opposition parties.
SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals	17.10: Promote a universal, rules-based… multilateral trading system.	“Ongoing trade negotiations with the United States.” “Increasing defense spending to two percent of GDP by 2027.”

Source: csis.org