Join - Iriai

Japanese: 入会 - いりあい

It is also written as 'nyuso' or 'nyuai'. The custom of a group of residents (villages) in a certain area entering a certain forest (common land) for the purpose of collecting plants and fallen leaves for fuel, fertilizer, and feed, and for grazing cattle is generally called iriai, and the right to enter is called iriai. There are various forms of iriai, such as who owns the land and whether the subject of the right to use the land is mainly the village or the village residents, but their main characteristic is that they are all regulated by custom. In the days when agriculture was centered on the natural economy, common rights were the basis of peasant life, and even today, when the commodity economy has spread, they have a considerable social effect. On the other hand, if iriai is carried out without control, it can lead to the degradation of land, and the existence of iriai can easily cause problems such as hindering land development. In addition, with the establishment of modern ownership, the customs that regulate the content of rights themselves are changing due to contradictions and conflicts with it. A complex combination of these factors often gives rise to serious disputes over membership.

[Yasuyuki Takahashi]

History of membership

The principle that "the benefits of mountains, rivers, bushes and streams are shared by both the public and private" that had existed since the Ritsuryo period collapsed with the development of the manor system, and private monopoly of mountains and fields began. In this process, the common use of mountains and fields by soson (iriai use) was seen, but the demarcation of village boundaries that accompanied the Taiko land survey also encouraged the division of iriai land, building the foundation for early modern iriai use. However, it was only from the Edo period onwards that we were able to get a clear picture of the actual state of iriai practices.

[Masatake Iioka]

Purpose and name

Before the widespread use of chemical fertilizers, especially in the Edo period, in agricultural production, alongside purchased fertilizers (kin-hi) such as dried sardines, herring meal, and oil cake, nearby grasses in the mountains and fields (karishiki) and seaweed from the coast were used as important fertilizers that determined the yield. In rural areas with a self-sufficient economy, food collected from the mountains and fields (edible wild plants, mushrooms, nuts, etc.), livestock feed (hay), fuel (firewood and charcoal), civil engineering and building materials, and roof thatch played an important role in supporting agriculture and the lives of farmers. Since only a few powerful farmers were able to individually own the mountains and fields that supplied the above-mentioned necessities, most other farmers usually used forests and fields jointly held by one village (murachu iriai) or several to several dozen villages (murawa iriai) under certain regulations. This kind of joint forest and field usufruct is called iriai, and the place where they are shared is called iriaiyama (iriai land), but when the items to be collected are specific, they may be called by the name of the area, such as karishibaba (harvesting area), hayba (hay field), or kayano (hay field).

[Masatake Iioka]

form

Since the actual circumstances of iriai are diverse, there are no uniform ways of categorizing them. For example, in the case of broadly categorizing iriai into hon iriai and kasegi (kagata) iriai based on the rights involved, hon iriai refers to the case where a group with equal rights joins together, while kasegi iriai refers to the act of another village (kagata) joining together with the permission of a local village that has surplus land in the common. In such cases, the kasegata generally pays a reasonable compensation (usufruct fee) to the local village, called nosen (field money), note (field hand), yamatemai (rice on the mountain), etc., but there are also cases where the relationship is completely benevolent and the members join together free of charge.

In addition to this, when classified by the type of owner of the common land, there are cases where the common land is shared by (1) village-wide commons where the village shares its own land, (2) other village commons where the village shares other villages' land, and (3) village-to-village commons where multiple villages share their common land, as well as cases where the common land is shared by a community, (4) individual land, (5) community land, and (6) forests directly controlled by the feudal lord (Ohayashi). Furthermore, it is possible to classify the common land by the village units or groups that make up a village in the same way as (1), (2), and (3).

[Masatake Iioka]

Regulation

Regarding the use of forests and lands, conflicts of interest between lords and farmers gave rise to lordly regulations, and internal regulations also worked among farmers to prevent excessive use. In other words, in the early modern period, lords established forests for the purpose of securing timber for their own use and as a source of revenue, but this was done by enclosing the aforementioned common agricultural forests, which resulted in the elimination or severe restriction of farmers' use of forests and lands. Furthermore, the development of new fields, which was active in the Edo period, increased the demand for fertilizer, but because the areas to be developed were mostly wilderness, which was a source of fertilizer, it resulted in a relative decrease in common lands. Under these circumstances, villages that were newly established through the development of new fields could not have common lands nearby, so they had no choice but to purchase them from other villages, pay usufruct fees to other villages' common lands to enter the mountains, or develop common lands further inland. These operations were indispensable, especially when the use of fertilizer was not profitable. With the relative decline of common land and the development of the hinterland, disputes (mountain disputes) between other common groups over the ownership of common land and the right to use it frequently arose. In addition, in order to prevent the destruction of common land through excessive use, restrictions on use were strengthened within the same common group. Most of the restrictions on use included restrictions on what could be collected (standing trees, firewood, charcoal, grass, thatch, etc.) and the period, restrictions on the type and quantity of collecting tools (axes, sickles, etc.) and the number of members per household, and restrictions on the method of transporting collected materials (hiring temporary laborers, using own or borrowed oxen and horses, etc.). The criteria for restrictions were often the area of fields and the amount of rice produced by each farmer. Violation of these rules often led to sanctions such as a ban on entering the mountains or ostracism from the village.

[Masatake Iioka]

Mutation

As the commodity economy progressed, it became easier to obtain purchased fertilizer (squeezed cakes), and the significance of common grasslands as a source of fertilizer significantly diminished. Particularly in rural areas near cities, the use of commercial fertilizer increased as the cultivation of commercial crops for consumption in cities became more popular, and grasslands that had previously been used for fertilizer were reused to produce firewood and charcoal for the cities and to grow standing trees (timber). In order to commercialize firewood and timber and make a profit, it was more efficient for each person to decide on their share and produce in a planned manner rather than using the common land jointly. Also, in order to avoid degradation due to excessive common use, it was effective to divide the land and privatize it permanently (wariyama), or to reassign shares at regular intervals (warikaeyama), and some areas saw the division of common land for use. These trends became more noticeable in the late Edo period, but compared to the total number of common lands, they still amounted to a small proportion, and the majority of common lands were not privatized until the land-tax reform.

In the process of the land tax reform, the Meiji government tried to organize the relationship between land owners, such as residential land, cultivated land, and forest land, on the principle of "one land, one owner," but common land that did not fit this framework was incorporated into public land. Furthermore, in the process of the subsequent process of distinguishing between public and private ownership of forest land, strict certification conditions were imposed when issuing private land certificates for the aforementioned common land, and many of them were incorporated into public forests as there was insufficient evidence of private ownership. As a result, it triggered a movement to return private land to public ownership all over the country. Prior to this, there were places where common land registers were registered in the name of the representative of the common rights holders, which avoided incorporation into public land, but there were also cases where these were later resold, causing conflicts between the common rights holders and the common rights holders (Kotsunagi Incident). The use of common land, which continued until the time of the Pacific War, has been rapidly declining since the postwar spread of chemical fertilizers and fossil fuels such as gas, oil, and coal. However, there are examples such as the East Fuji Maneuver Area (Shizuoka Prefecture) where an agreement on membership was concluded between the East Fuji Membership Association and the Defense Agency (now the Ministry of Defense) in June 1959, and even today, local women's groups are using the membership practices at the North Fuji Maneuver Area (Yamanashi Prefecture) as an excuse to call for the removal of the maneuver area.

[Masatake Iioka]

Legal nature of membership rights

The legal relationship of common rights is governed by custom and is very complicated. In addition to being governed by custom, the Civil Code stipulates that the provisions of common rights apply to common rights that have the nature of common ownership, and that the provisions of easements apply mutatis mutandis to those that do not (Articles 263 and 294 of the Civil Code). Case law has determined that the former is when the common rights holders have ownership of the common land, and the latter is when they do not. However, even if the common rights holders themselves have ownership, they do not each have a share or a right to claim division, and it is said that this is a common right with a stronger collective character than ordinary common ownership. The management of the rights themselves belongs to the community of the village, and only the right to make a profit based on them belongs to each resident.

[Yasuyuki Takahashi]

Effect of membership rights and acquisition/loss

The content, scope, and method of the common right are all determined by the village rules or customs, and if one of the common holders makes a profit beyond that scope, or if a third party infringes on the common right, not only the village itself but also the other common holders can demand a halt to the illegal act and compensation for damages. Common rights are not suitable for registration, and are interpreted as being asserted against third parties without registration.

It is understood that the acquisition of common rights is entirely by custom, and that acquisition by contract is not permitted. Common rights held by a village are extinguished by the loss of the common land or by the consent of all residents. Common rights as an individual resident's right to profit arise when the resident acquires the qualifications to be a resident, and are extinguished when the resident loses the qualifications.

[Yasuyuki Takahashi]

Laws on forest land commons

Common rights are undergoing great changes today, and the form of joint ownership and the manner of use recognized there have taken on various forms. Therefore, in order to promote the modernization of rights relating to common land, which had previously hindered the development and intensive use of forests, and to contribute to the development of agricultural management, the "Law Concerning Promotion of Modernization of Rights Relations Pertaining to Common Forests, etc." (Law No. 126 of 1966) was enacted. This law encouraged the conversion of common rights into privately owned land or ordinary shared land. Sea common rights are also called fishing rights or fishing rights.

[Yasuyuki Takahashi]

"A Study of Joining Memberships" by Kainou Michitaka (1942, Nippon Hyoronsha)" ▽ "Legal History Essays 2" by Nakata Kaoru (1928, Iwanami Shoten)" ▽ "The Establishment and Development of Joining Membership Practices in the Early Modern Period" by Hirasawa Kiyoto (1967, Ochanomizu Shobo)" ▽ "A Study of the Disintegration Process of the Early Modern Joining Membership System" by Harada Toshimaru (1969, Hanawa Shobo)

[Reference] | Fishing rights | Kozuna case | Soyu

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

入相、入合などとも書かれる。一定地域の住民の団体（村落）が、燃料、肥料、飼料用の草木や落ち葉の採取、ウシの放牧などを目的として、一定の山林原野（入会地）に立ち入る慣習を一般に入会といい、入り会う権利を入会権という。入会には、入会地盤の所有者がだれであるか、入会地盤を利用する権利の主体が主として村落であるか村落の住民であるかなどの点でさまざまな形態があるが、すべて慣習によって規律されるところに大きな特色がみられる。農業が自然経済中心であった時代には、入会権は農民生活の基礎をなしていたが、商品経済が浸透した今日においてもかなり重要な社会的作用をもっている。反面、統制なしに入会が行われると、土地の荒廃を招き、入会の存在が土地の開発を妨げるなどの弊害も生じやすい。また、近代的所有権の確立とともにそれとの矛盾や対抗関係をめぐって、権利の内容を規制する慣習自体も変化しつつある。これらの要因が複雑に絡み合って、入会をめぐる深刻な争いがしばしば生じている。

［高橋康之］

入会の沿革

律令(りつりょう)以来の「山川藪沢(さんせんそうたく)之(の)利ハ公私之(これ)ヲ共ニ」するとの原則は、荘園(しょうえん)制の発展とともに崩れ、山野の私的独占が始まる。この過程で惣村(そうそん)による山野の共同利用（入会利用）がみられたが、太閤(たいこう)検地の実施に伴う村切り（村落境界の画定）は入会地の分割をも促し、近世的入会利用の基礎を築いた。しかしなんといっても入会慣行の実態を明確にうかがい知ることができるようになるのは、江戸時代以降のことである。

［飯岡正毅］

目的と呼称

化学肥料が普及する以前、ことに江戸時代の農業生産においては、干鰯(ほしか)、鰊粕(にしんかす)、油粕などの購入肥料（金肥）と並んで、手近な山野の草（刈敷(かりしき)）、海浜の海藻類は、収穫を左右する重要な肥料として利用された。また自給自足経済下の農村にあっては、山野から採取する食料（山菜、茸(きのこ)、木の実など）、家畜の飼料（秣(まぐさ)）や、燃料（薪炭(しんたん)）、土木建築用材、屋根萱(かや)などは、農業および農民生活を支えるうえで重要な役割を果たした。以上の必需品ともいうべき物資の供給地である山野を、個人でもつことができるのは一部の有力農民に限られたから、その他の大半の農民は、一村（村中入会）もしくは数か村から数十か村（村々入会）が共同で保持した林野を、一定の規制の下で利用するのが通例であった。このような共同の林野用益行為を入会といい、また入り会う場を入会山（入会地）とよぶが、採取物が特定化している場合には、その名を冠して刈敷場、秣場、萱場（萱野）などと称することもある。

［飯岡正毅］

形態

入会はその実態が多種多様であるため、類別の仕方も一様でない。たとえば、権利関係に着目して本入会と稼(かせぎ)（稼方）入会に大別する方法では、本入会は同等の権利を有する集団が入り会う場合をさし、稼入会は入会地に余裕のある地元村の許諾によって他村（稼方）が入り会う行為をいう。その際、稼方は地元村に対し野銭(のせん)、野手(のて)、山手米(やまてまい)などと称する応分の代償（用益料）を納めるのが一般的であるが、まったく恩恵的に無償で入り会う関係もある。

　これとは別に、入会地盤の持ち主の別によって分類すると、(1)自村持地に入り会う村中入会、(2)他村持地に入り会う他村入会、(3)複数村がその共有地に入り会う村々入会など、共同体のもつ林野に入り会うほか、(4)個人持地や(5)仲間持地、(6)領主直轄林（御林(おはやし)）に入り会う例などに分けられる。さらに、村を構成する部落単位・組での(1)(2)(3)と同様の類別も可能である。

［飯岡正毅］

規制

林野の利用をめぐっては、領主と農民との間に発生する利害の対立が領主的規制を生むとともに、農民相互の間にも過度の用益を避けるための内部規制が働いた。つまり、近世初期には、領主が自家用材および財源としての材木を確保するなどの目的で御林を設定したが、これは前述の入会農用林を囲い込む形で行われたから、それによって農民の林野用益が排除されたり、大幅な制限を受けることになったのである。また江戸時代に入って盛んに行われた新田開発は、一方で肥料の需要を増大させるにもかかわらず、開発対象地が肥料供給源である原野が多かったから、入会地の相対的減少を招く結果となった。こうした状況下で新田開発によって新たに成立した村は、入会地を手近な所にもつことができなかったので、他村より購入するか、他村の入会地に用益料を出して入山するか、あるいはまた、それより奥地に入会地を開発するよりほかなかった。とくに金肥の使用が採算にあわない場合には、これらの作業は不可欠であった。このような入会地の相対的な減少と奥地の開発過程とにおいては、他の入会集団と入会地籍の帰属および利用権をめぐる紛争（山論(さんろん)）をしばしば生ずることとなり、また過大な用益による入会地の荒廃を回避するため、同一入会集団のなかでは利用規制の強化をもたらした。利用規制の多くは、採取対象（立木や薪炭、草、萱など）および期間の限定、採取用具（斧(おの)、鎌(かま)など）の種類と数量ならびに1戸当りの入会人数の制限、採取物の搬出方法（担い人夫の臨時雇い、自前・借用牛馬の利用など）の規制などであり、規制の規準にはしばしば各農民が所持する田畑の面積や、石高の多寡が用いられた。そしてこれらの掟(おきて)に違反した場合は、入山禁止や村八分などの制裁を加えられることが多かった。

［飯岡正毅］

変容

商品経済の進展に伴い、購入肥料（搾粕(しめかす)類）の入手が容易になると、肥料源としての入会採草地はその意義を大幅に後退させることになる。とくに都市近郊の農村では、都市で消費される商品作物の栽培が盛んとなるにつれて金肥の使用は増加し、それまでの採草地は都市向けの薪炭の生産や立木（材木）の育成の場として再利用されるようになる。薪炭や材木を商品化して利益を得るにあたっては、入会地を共同で利用するより、個人の持ち分を決め、めいめいが計画的に生産するほうがより効率的であったし、また過大な入会用益による荒廃を回避する意味からも、これを分割し恒久的に私有化したり（割山(わりやま)）、あるいは一定期間ごとに持ち分を割り替えるやり方（割替山(わりかえやま)）が有効であったので、入会地を分割利用する地域もみられる。これらの傾向は江戸時代後期に顕著になるが、入会地全体からみればなおわずかな数で、大半の入会地は私有化されることなく地租改正を迎えた。

　明治政府は地租改正作業において、宅地、耕地、林野などの土地と所有者との関係を「一地一主」の原則で整理しようとしたが、この枠に収まらない入会地は公有地に編入した。またその後の林野官民有区別作業の過程で、前述の入会地に民有地地券を発行する際、厳しい認定条件を課したため、その多くは民有の証拠不十分として官林に組み込まれた。その結果、全国各地に民有地引戻し運動を引き起こすこととなったのである。これより先、入会地籍を入会権者の代表名義にして官有地編入を免れた所もみられるが、のちにこれが転売されて入会権者たちとの間で紛争をかもす例（小繋(こつなぎ)事件）もあった。その後、太平洋戦争時まで続いた入会地利用は、戦後の化学肥料、ガスや石油、石炭などの化石燃料の普及によって急速に衰退しつつあるが、東富士演習場（静岡県）内の国有地において、東富士入会組合と防衛庁（現防衛省）との間で入会についての協定（1959年6月）が結ばれた例や、現在も北富士演習場（山梨県）における入会慣行を盾に、地元婦人団体を中心にした人々が演習場撤去を求めている例などもある。

［飯岡正毅］

入会権の法律的性質

入会権の法律関係は慣習によって規律され、非常に複雑である。民法は慣習によるほか、共有の性質を有する入会権には共有の規定を適用し、共有の性質を有しないものについては地役権の規定を準用すると定めている（民法263条・294条）。判例は、入会権者が入会地の所有権をもっている場合が前者に、入会地の所有権をもっていない場合が後者にあたるとしている。しかし、入会権者自身が所有権をもっている場合でも、各自は持分を有しないし、分割請求権もなく、普通の共有よりも団体的性格の強い、総有(そうゆう)であるといわれている。そして権利そのものの管理は、村落という共同体に属し、それに基づいて収益する権能だけが各住民に属するものとされる。

［高橋康之］

入会権の効力・得喪

共同収益権の内容、範囲、方法などはすべて村落の規約または慣習によって定まり、入会権者中のある者がその範囲を越えて収益した場合や、第三者が入会権を侵害した場合には、村落自身はもちろん、他の入会権者も、その不法行為の停止や損害賠償を請求できる。入会権は登記に適せず、登記なしに第三者に対抗できると解されている。

　入会権の取得はすべて慣習により、契約による取得は認めない趣旨と解されている。村落の有する入会権は、入会地の滅失または住民全員の同意によって消滅する。住民各自の収益権としての入会権は、住民としての資格を得たときに生じ、失ったときに消滅する。

［高橋康之］

入会林野に関する法律

入会権は今日では大きく変化しつつあり、そこに認められている共同所有の態様、その利用形態もさまざまな形に変化してきた。そこで、従来、林野の開発、高度利用を妨げていた入会地に係る権利関係の近代化を助長し、農業経営の発展に資する目的で、「入会林野等に係る権利関係の近代化の助長に関する法律」（昭和41年法律126号）が制定された。この法律により、入会権を個人の所有地あるいは普通の共有地に変換することが助長されるようになった。なお、海の入会権は入漁権あるいは入会漁業権とよばれる。

［高橋康之］

『戒能通孝著『入会の研究』（1942・日本評論社）』▽『中田薫著『法制史論集2』（1928・岩波書店）』▽『平沢清人著『近世入会慣行の成立と展開』（1967・御茶の水書房）』▽『原田敏丸著『近世入会制度解体過程の研究』（1969・塙書房）』

[参照項目] | 漁業権 | 小繋事件 | 総有

出典　小学館　日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)について　情報 | 凡例

<<: Common fishing ground - Iriaigyojo

>>: Ely (English spelling)