Municipal merger - Shichoson Gappei

Japanese: 市町村合併 - しちょうそんがっぺい

The merger refers to the merging of two or more municipalities into a new one, or the incorporation of all or part of another municipality's area into the area of one municipality. The procedure is stipulated in Article 7 of the Local Autonomy Law, but the government has also promoted municipal mergers by enacting the Law on Special Measures for Municipal Mergers (Law No. 6 of 1965), which includes preferential treatment for merging municipalities. The Law on Special Measures for Municipal Mergers was enacted in 1965 (Showa 40) with a ten-year term, and has since been extended every ten years, in 1975, 1985, and 1995 (Heisei 7). However, seeing certain results from the "Great Heisei Mergers" described below, it was not extended again from 2005, and instead the Law on Special Measures for Municipal Mergers (Law No. 59 of 2004, abbreviated as the New Special Merger Law) was enacted to promote the remaining mergers. At the end of March 2010, the law was renamed back to the Act on Special Provisions for Municipal Mergers, its purpose was changed from promoting mergers to facilitating mergers, and it was made a 10-year temporary law. Municipal mergers are primarily carried out to increase the size and administrative and financial capacity of municipalities so that they can handle a certain level of administrative affairs. Nationwide mergers with this intention have been carried out many times as national policy in Japan.

[Tsujiyama Yukinori]

The Great Mergers of the Meiji and Showa Periods

In the nationwide mergers that took place in 1889 (Meiji 22), towns and villages with 300 households or less were merged with other towns and villages, reducing the number of towns and villages from over 70,000 to one-fifth, or just over 15,000, and the town and village system enacted the previous year was implemented in the newly merged towns and villages. Through these mergers, natural villages that had existed since the Edo period were integrated, and local public entities responsible for local administration were created.

There was also a nationwide merger that took place over a three-year plan starting in October 1953 (Showa 28). The mergers of small towns and villages were encouraged as a prerequisite for implementing the reallocation of administrative affairs proposed in the 1949 Shoup Recommendations, but as this did not proceed easily, the Town and Village Merger Promotion Act (Law No. 258 of 1953) was enacted, which granted various administrative and financial benefits to merging towns and villages. Based on this, the population of the school districts of new junior high schools was estimated at 8,000 people, and towns and villages with populations of 8,000 or less were allowed to merge with other cities. As a result, the number of towns and villages, nearly 10,000, was reduced to one-third, and as many mergers led to the formation of cities, the number of cities doubled.

[Tsujiyama Yukinori]

The Heisei Great Mergers

Mergers since the mid-1990s, known as the "Great Heisei Mergers," have no population or other criteria, but are based on the Municipal Merger Special Act, which was revised in April 1995. This is known as a "carrot and stick" policy, as it actively promotes mergers in order to strengthen the capacity of decentralization, by including financial exceptions on the one hand and reducing preferential financial treatment (stage adjustment) for small towns and villages on the other. It also established a system (resident initiative system) whereby residents can request the establishment of a merger council, and introduced a referendum (proposed by the mayor or by direct request from residents) in the event that a proposal to establish a merger council is rejected, paving the way for resident-led merger promotion.

Subsequently, in February 1999, the Economic Strategy Council, an advisory body to the Prime Minister established by then Prime Minister Obuchi Keizo, indicated a direction to consolidate the 3,200 or so cities, towns, and villages to 1,000 or fewer. In response, the government notified each prefecture to create a pattern for city, town, and village mergers by the end of fiscal 2000, and in March 2001, the Municipal Merger Support Headquarters was established within the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. Behind the government's policy to promote city, town, and village mergers was the recognition that it was necessary to strengthen the administrative and financial capabilities of cities, towns, and villages with the transition to an era of decentralization that began in 2000, as well as the need to reduce local administrative costs amid a prolonged fiscal crisis. There has also been criticism of the need to create larger municipalities as a measure to sustainably maintain regions in a society with an impending population decline.

[Tsujiyama Yukinori]

Government Merger Promotion Initiatives

In order to promote mergers, the government has prepared many measures to promote mergers through budgetary measures, in addition to the special provisions of the previous Municipal Merger Special Act and the New Municipal Merger Special Act. These are extremely diverse, but can be broadly divided into (1) financial preferential treatment, (2) consideration for the assembly, (3) removal of other factors that cause anxiety about mergers, and (4) support or recommendations for mergers by the national and prefectural governments. One of the financial preferential treatment measures is the 10-year extension of the local allocation tax calculation. In general, when the size of a municipality changes due to a merger, the calculation of the local allocation tax is redone at that point. Normally, the advantage of scale comes into play with mergers, so the local allocation tax tends to decrease. As a special measure against this, the calculations of each municipality before the merger will be continued for 10 years, and these will be added together and used for grant. There is also a special measure that allows the issuance of merger special bonds (local bonds that can be borrowed for 10 years from the year of the merger) to be used for new city construction projects following the merger, which attracted the attention of businesses struggling with the recession. As a consideration for assemblies, measures were taken to minimize the disadvantages to assembly members due to mergers, such as mitigating the sharp decline in the number of assembly members due to mergers, special extensions of terms of office, and easing of assembly member pension eligibility. Other measures were also taken to remove concerns about mergers. For example, to deal with the fact that mergers would not result in city status, the population requirement for cities was lowered from 50,000 to 30,000 for merged municipalities only, and in response to concerns that the voices of residents would become less heard, measures were taken such as allowing each former town or village to establish a regional council, regional autonomous district, and special merger districts while guaranteeing the autonomy of the former town or village for five years. In addition, to promote mergers, the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications drew up basic merger guidelines and recommended that prefectures establish merger councils.

[Tsujiyama Yukinori]

current situation

In opposition to the government's strong urging for mergers, which included numerous exceptions, some local assemblies and mayors issued "declarations against mergers," while over 2,000 municipalities established voluntary or statutory merger councils. The number of municipalities, which stood at 3,232 at the end of March 1999, had been reduced to 1,727 by the end of March 2010. In response to this progress in mergers, the 29th Local Government System Research Council recommended that the Heisei merger promotion movement be brought to an end at the end of March 2010.

[Tsujiyama Yukinori]

Facilitating mergers

The government revised the New Special Merger Law, switching from the previous policy of promoting mergers to a policy of facilitating mergers. As measures to facilitate mergers, the number of assembly members and special provisions for their tenure, special provisions for local taxes, changes to the calculation of local allocation tax, citizen initiatives and referendums on merger councils, and the system of special merger districts were retained, while other measures were abolished, and the deadline, which was originally scheduled to end at the end of March 2010, was extended by 10 years.

[Tsujiyama Yukinori]

"Optimal City Size and Municipal Mergers, by Yoshimura Hiroshi (1999, Toyo Keizai Shinposha)" ▽ "Wait a Minute, Municipal Mergers, edited by Mitsuhashi Yoshiaki and the Local Government Problems Research Institute (2000, Local Government Research Institute)" ▽ "Autonomy, Decentralization and Municipal Mergers, edited by Maruyama Yasuto (2001, Imagine Publishing)" ▽ "Municipal Mergers - Residents Decide the Future of Their Town, by Nakanishi Hiroyuki, revised new edition (2002, Local Government Research Institute)" ▽ "Municipal Mergers and the Future of Regions, by Hobo Takehiko (2002, Iwanami Shoten)" ▽ "What I Wanted to Know About Municipal Mergers, by Takashima Shigeki (2002, Gyosei)" ▽ "The Changing Shape of This Country - The Great Municipal Mergers of the Heisei Era, edited by the Association of Local Government and Decentralization Journalists (2002, Nippon Hyoronsha)" ▽ "Eliminate Rural Towns and Villages! -- The logic of villages resisting municipal mergers (2002, Nanpo Shinsha) ▽ Public Service Personnel Training Association (ed.), Local Government Personnel Training Special Edition: Municipalities that will and won't go bankrupt (2003) ▽ Machida Toshihiko (ed.), The Financial Science of the Great Heisei Mergers (2006, Kojinsha) ▽ Obara Takaharu and Nagano Prefecture Local Government Research Center (eds.), The Great Heisei Mergers and Regional Unions -- An Empirical Analysis of Nagano Prefecture Regional Administration (2007, Kojinsha) ▽ Imai Teru, The Politics of the Great Heisei Mergers (2008, Kojinsha)

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

二つ以上の市町村を合体して新たに一つの市町村にしたり、一つの市町村の区域内にほかの市町村の区域の全部または一部を編入すること。その手続は地方自治法第7条に規定されているが、このほかに政府は合併市町村への優遇措置を盛り込んだ市町村の合併の特例に関する法律（市町村合併特例法。昭和40年法律第6号）を制定して市町村合併を促進してきた。市町村合併特例法は1965年（昭和40）に10年の期限付きで制定され、その後、1975年、1985年、1995年（平成7）と10年ごとに延長されてきた。しかし後述する「平成の大合併」の一定の成果をみて、2005年からの再延長はせずに、市町村の合併の特例等に関する法律（平成16年法律第59号。略称は新合併特例法）として残余の合併の促進を図った。その後、2010年3月末に市町村の合併の特例に関する法律と元の法律名に戻し、法の目的を合併の推進から合併の円滑化と改めて、10年間の時限法とした。市町村合併は、主として市町村の規模・行財政能力を大きくさせることにより、一定水準の行政事務を処理できるようにするために行われる。そうした意図による全国的な合併が、日本では国の政策としてたびたび行われてきた。

［辻山幸宣］

明治・昭和の大合併

1889年（明治22）に行われた全国的な合併では、300戸以下の町村を他町村と合併させて、7万余の町村を5分の1の1万5000余に減少させ、合併した新町村に、前年制定の町村制を施行した。この合併により、江戸期以来続いてきた自然村が統合され、地方行政を担う地方公共団体が創出された。

　また、1953年（昭和28）10月から3か年計画で行われた全国的な合併がある。1949年のシャウプ勧告で提案された行政事務再配分を実施する前提として小規模町村の合併が奨励されたが、容易に進まなかったので、合併町村に各種の行財政上の特典を認めた町村合併促進法（昭和28年法律第258号）を制定。それに基づいて、新制中学校の校区人口を8000人と見積もり、人口8000人以下の町村を他市町村と合併させた。その結果、1万近い町村が3分の1に減少し、また合併して市になるものが多かったので、市の数が倍増した。

［辻山幸宣］

平成の大合併

「平成の大合併」と称される1990年代なかば以降の合併は、人口などの基準はないが、1995年（平成7）4月に改正された市町村合併特例法に基づいている。これは地方分権の受け皿強化のために積極的な合併促進措置として、一方で財政特例を盛り込み、他方で小規模町村の財政優遇（段階補正）を縮小するなど、「飴(あめ)とムチ」政策といわれている。また、合併協議会の設置を住民から請求する制度（住民発議制度）を新設し、加えて合併協議会の設置議案が否決された場合の住民投票（長の提起または住民の直接請求による）を導入するなど、住民主導による合併促進の道を開いた。

　その後、当時の首相小渕恵三(おぶちけいぞう)によって設置された内閣総理大臣の諮問機関である経済戦略会議が、1999年2月に3200余りある市町村を1000以下に統合する方向を示した。これを受けて、政府は2000年度中に各都道府県に市町村の合併パターンを作成するよう通達、2001年3月には総務省に市町村合併支援本部を設置した。政府のこのような市町村合併促進政策の背景には、2000年からの地方分権時代への移行に伴って、市町村の行財政力を高める必要があるとの認識のほか、長引く財政危機のなかで地方行政経費を節減しなければならないという事情もある。また、迫りくる人口減少社会において持続的に地域を維持していくための方策として、大きな自治体をつくる必要性も指摘されている。

［辻山幸宣］

政府による合併推進策

政府は合併を促進するため、先の市町村合併特例法、新合併特例法による特例のほか、予算措置などによっても多数の合併推進策を用意していた。それはきわめて多岐にわたっているが、大きく(1)財政上の優遇措置、(2)議会に対する配慮、(3)その他合併不安要因の除去、(4)国、都道府県による合併支援または勧告など、に分けることができる。財政上の優遇措置の一つは地方交付税算定替えの10年間延長である。一般には合併によって規模等が変更された場合その時点で交付税の計算をやり直す。通常、合併に伴って規模の利点が働くので、交付税は減少する傾向になる。これに対する特例として、10年間は合併前のそれぞれの市町村の計算を引き継ぎ、これらを合算して交付するというものである。また、合併に伴う新市建設事業にあてるための合併特例債（合併年度から10年間借り入れることができる地方債）の発行を認めるという特例もあり、不景気にあえぐ事業者の熱い視線を集めた。議会に対する配慮としては、合併に伴う議員数の激減緩和措置、任期の特例的延長、議員年金受給資格の緩和など、合併に伴う議員の不利益を最小限にする措置がとられた。その他合併に対する不安を取り除くための措置も用意されていた。たとえば、合併しても市になれないことへの対処として、市の人口要件を合併市町村に限って5万人から3万人に引き下げたり、住民の声が届きにくくなるとの危惧(きぐ)には、旧町村ごとに地域審議会や地域自治区、5年間は旧町村の自治権を保障したまま合併特例区を置くことができるなどの措置をとった。また、合併を推進するための総務大臣による合併基本指針の作成や、都道府県による合併協議会設置の勧告などもあった。

［辻山幸宣］

現状

このような多数の特例を伴った政府の強い合併要請に反発して「合併しない宣言」を行う議会や首長が登場する一方、2000を超える市町村が任意または法定の合併協議会を設置した。1999年3月末に3232あった市町村は、2010年3月末には1727市町村まで統合された。このような合併の進展を受けて、第29次地方制度調査会は2010年3月末で平成合併推進運動にひとくぎりをつけることを答申した。

［辻山幸宣］

合併の円滑化へ

政府は新合併特例法を改正して、それまでの合併推進政策を合併円滑化政策に切り替えた。合併円滑化策として、議会の議員定数と在任特例、地方税に関する特例、地方交付税算定替え、合併協議会の住民発議と住民投票、合併特例区の制度が存置され、これ以外の措置は廃止したうえで、本来2010年3月末までであった期限を10年間延長することとした。

［辻山幸宣］

『吉村弘著『最適都市規模と市町村合併』（1999・東洋経済新報社）』▽『三橋良士明・自治体問題研究所編『ちょっと待て市町村合併』（2000・自治体研究社）』▽『丸山康人編著『自治・分権と市町村合併』（2001・イマジン出版）』▽『中西啓之著『市町村合併――まちの将来は住民がきめる』改訂新版（2002・自治体研究社）』▽『保母武彦著『市町村合併と地域のゆくえ』（2002・岩波書店）』▽『高島茂樹著『市町村合併のそこが知りたかった』（2002・ぎょうせい）』▽『自治・分権ジャーナリストの会編『この国のかたちが変わる――平成の市町村大合併』（2002・日本評論社）』▽『久岡学他著『田舎の町村を消せ！――市町村合併に抗うムラの論理』（2002・南方新社）』▽『公務職員研修協会編・刊『地方自治職員研修臨時増刊号　破綻する自治体、しない自治体』（2003）』▽『町田俊彦編著『「平成大合併」の財政学』（2006・公人社）』▽『小原隆治・長野県地方自治研究センター編『平成大合併と広域連合――長野県広域行政の実証分析』（2007・公人社）』▽『今井照著『「平成大合併」の政治学』（2008・公人社）』