ISSN 34-003 Journal of International Development and Cooperation Vol 3 No 2007 IDEC (Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation) Hiroshima University JAPAN

ⅰ 国 際 協 力 研 究 誌 第 3 巻 第 号 2007 年 3 月 目 次 ( 総 説 ) Christopher HAAMBOKOMA, Nature and Causes of Learning Difficulties in Genetics at High School Level in Zambia................ ( 原 著 論 文 ) Masaru ICHIHASHI, TFP and Production Factors over the Post-War Period in Japan's Macro Economy..................... 金 原 達 夫 藤 井 秀 道 金 子 慎 治, 日 本 企 業 における 環 境 行 動 と 経 済 環 境 パフォーマンスの 関 係 -ポーター 仮 説 の 検 証 -.................................................................... 2 Francisco A. MAGNO, Environmental Capacity and Decentralized Governance in the Philippines........................... 3 Eutiquio L. ROTAQUIO, JR., Nobukazu NAKAGOSHI and Ronaldo L. ROTAQUIO, Species Composition of Mangrove Forests in Aurora, Philippines - A Special Reference to the Presence of Kandelia Candel (L.) Druce............................... 6 Ana PEREZ-KUROKI, Yoshiyuki ISOZAKI, Akira KIKUCHI and Nobukazu NAKAGOSHI, Application of Asian Environment Simulator (AES) to Environmental Assessment in Haji River Watershed................................................................... 7 Ana PEREZ-KUROKI, Yoshiyuki ISOZAKI, Akira KIKUCHI, and Nobukazu NAKAGOSHI, High Resolution Stream Network in Haji Dam Watershed........................................ 8 Ahmad Darobin LUBIS and Hajime KUMAGAI, Effects of Cattle Barnyard Compost and Nitrogen Fertilizer Application on Yield and Chemical Composition of Maize (Zea mays L.) and Italian Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) in Double Cropping System................................................................ 0 Mohammed HAGGAG, Atmosphere, Land Surface, Hydrology, Ocean Wave, and Ocean Current Model (ALHOM) in Asia Environmental Simulator............................................................ Sharapiya B. KAKIMOVA, Capacity Building for Stable Government: Post-Conflict Reconstruction of Afghanistan................ 3 Kusumi Vasantha DHANAPALA, Focus on Language Learning Strategies of Advanced Learners in Japan and Sri Lanka................. 53

ⅱ 別 所 裕 介, 現 代 チベットの 聖 地 巡 礼 から 見 る 宗 教 復 興 改 革 開 放 期 の 仏 教 伝 統 と 民 衆 儀 礼......................................................... 65 Arun KHATRI-CHHETRI, Narendra Mangal JOSHI and Keshav Lall MAHARJAN, Intervention on Livelihood Management through Community-Based Organizations: Evidence from Rural Nepal........................................................................ 87 Niraj Prakash JOSHI and Keshav Lall MAHARJAN, Assessment of Food Self-Sufficiency and Food Security Situation in Nepal............................ 20 Narendra Mangal JOSHI and Keshav Lall MAHARJAN, Institutional Changes in Forest Resource Management and Change in Forest Coverage in Nepal.......... 23 ( 研 究 ノート) 山 下 隆 男, アジア 環 境 シミュレーター................................................................. 253 広 島 大 学 大 学 院 国 際 協 力 研 究 科

Review Nature and Causes of Learning Difficulties in Genetics at High School Level in Zambia Christopher HAAMBOKOMA,2 Visiting Professor Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University -5- Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima, 73-852, Japan Head of Department 2 School of Education, University of Zambia P.O. Box 3237, Lusaka, Zambia E-mail: christopherhaambokoma@yahoo.com Abstract Genetics has been identified as one of the difficult topics in biology for high school students in Zambia. This paper reports a study conducted to determine the nature and causes of learning difficulties students encounter in genetics at high school level in Zambia. A survey design was used and data were obtained from students and teachers using interview schedules and self-completion questionnaires. Quota sampling procedure was used to select the sample from the target population. Data collected were analysed using content analysis approach. The study found that students had difficulties understanding among others genetic crosses, genetic terms, mitosis and meiosis as well as mutation. Factors identified to have caused learning difficulties included: inability by teachers to explain clearly to students; none teaching of the topic; topic taught near examination time, fast presentation of lessons by some teachers; belief by some students that genetics was difficult to learn; lack of appropriate learning aids and inadequate time allocated to teaching of the topic. Some of the recommendations made were that: teacher training institutions must prepare biology teachers adequately to teach this topic well; adequate time should be allocated to teaching of genetics; teachers need in-service training to enable them use appropriate teaching methods for teaching genetics.. Introduction Genetics is one of the topics taught in biology at high school level in Zambia. This topic, which was introduced in the school certificate biology syllabus in the mid 70s, covers the following aspects: variations, mitosis and meiosis, monohybrid crossings, sex-determination, co-dominance and mutation (Curriculum Development Centre, 2000). Previous studies in Zambia have shown that genetics is perceived as a challenging topic for some students Journal of International Development and Cooperation, Vol.3, No., 2007, pp. -

2 Christopher HAAMBOKOMA and teachers. For example in a study by Rugumayo (78), teachers cited genetics as one of the topics they needed help in order to teach it effectively. A baseline study conducted in 4 by the ministry of education, found that genetics was one of the topics pupils regarded as difficult to learn in biology (MOE, 4). Haambokoma and Mwale (8) found that students at two national technical schools were of the view that teachers had difficulties teaching genetics effectively and therefore, students found it difficult to learn. In the same study, teachers also cited teaching of genetics as one of the areas they needed further professional development. Genetics was also one identified as challenging topic for female students by a group of teachers at a planning workshop for girls science camp in August (Zambia National Commission For UNESCO, ). Furthermore, reports of the chief examiner for the biology theory paper also indicate that candidates have had difficulties in answering questions on genetics in the final examination. For example the chief examiner s report of 7 stated that candidates seemed not to know genetic terminologies and also lacked understanding of the usage of genetic symbols. In a nation wide study conducted in 2002 by the Department of Mathematics and Science Education of the University of Zambia, genetic was rated as the most difficult topic to learn by 38.5% of student respondents and to teach by 25.5% of biology teachers who participated in the study (Haambokoma et al. 2002). Genetic has also been reported to be a difficult topic to teach and for students to learn at high school level in Kenya (Inset Curriculum Review Committee, 2002), United States of America (Banet and Ayuso, 2000; Moll and Allen, 87: Smith, 88; Stewart, 82 and 83), Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom (Treagust and Tsui, 2002). Although genetics has been identified as a difficult topic to learn among high school students in Zambia, the nature and causes of learning difficulties in this topic have not been investigated. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the nature and causes of learning difficulties experienced by students in genetics at high school level. It was hoped that this study would generate information which curriculum developers, textbook writers, heads of science departments, biology teacher educators and teachers of biology could use to improve the learning of genetics. It was also anticipated that the study would contribute to literature in this area. In pursuing the purpose of the study above, answers were sought to the following questions: () Which areas of genetics do students find difficult to learn? (2) What is the nature of difficulties students experience in genetics? (3) What are the causes of learning difficulties experienced in genetics? In this investigation, learning scientific concepts was assumed to be influenced by a number of factors, which were divided into two broad categories namely inputs and processes. Factors classified under inputs were: content to be taught; resources for teaching and learning; characteristics of teachers; characteristics of students; time allocated to teaching and the learning environment. Factors grouped under processes were quality of teaching; teaching strategies used; teaching approaches; use of teaching resources; learner participation and pace of lesson presentation. This theoretical framework derived from that given by Howies (2003) was used as a guide to explore the questions raised above. 2. Methodology The study used a sample survey design. It was felt that this design would enable the researcher to collect data from a wide range of respondents. The target population was all school leavers who studied biology in grade 2 (in this study they have been referred to as students) and teachers of biology. Data were obtained from a sample of 5 students/learners (27 males and 24 females) who studied genetics in grade 2 during the period 8 to 2003 and were at 40 different high schools located in different parts of Zambia and 23 teachers (8 males and 5 females) with teaching experience ranging from ½ to 27 years. The sample was drawn from the study population

Nature and Causes of Learning Difficulties in Genetics at High School Level in Zambia 3 using quota-sampling procedure. This method was preferred because there was no need for information such as sampling frame, total number of respondents and their location in order to pick the sample. Data were collected from respondents using interview schedules and self-completion questionnaires. The contents of the interview schedules and questionnaires were derived from the research questions. The researcher conducted one- to-one interviews with some respondents (both students and teachers). Interview schedules for interviewing learners were also given to research assistants who were trained to interview school leavers who studied biology at grade 2 level. They were also given self-completion questionnaires to distribute to teachers of biology and request them to complete. Interview was the main method of obtaining data from respondents. However where respondents could not be interviewed, they were given a questionnaire to complete. This made it possible to gather data from respondents where direct contact with the researcher was not possible. Data collected were analysed using content analysis approach. This involved identifying, categorizing and listing responses according to themes. Frequency of mention per theme was counted and quotations of some of the responses obtained were also used in order to illustrate directly the respondents views. 3. Findings The findings of the study are presented below under the following headings () areas and nature of learning difficulties experienced (2) factors which contributed to learning difficulties. 3. Areas and nature of learning difficulties experienced Difficulties were reported in the following areas of genetics: crosses; calculations; genetic terms; mutation; mitosis and meiosis; sex determination; variations; co-dominance. The nature of difficulties reported, in each of the topics above are given below. 3.. Crosses: 2 students (4%) responded that they had difficulties in dealing with genetic crosses. Included in this area were the following aspects punnet squares, backcrosses and family trees. The majority of them stated that they were not able to come up with correct crosses when given a word problem. One male student who learnt genetics in 7 put it as follows I had problems doing crosses and let alone predicting the outcomes of certain crosses. With respect to backcrosses, one learner who studied genetics in 200 expressed the difficulty as follows: When it came to back crosses, I could not find the genotype and phenotype of parents using the progenies. Nine () teachers (3%) also stated that learners had difficulties carrying out genetic crosses from a given statement. 3..2 Calculations: 5 students (0%) expressed experiencing problems in this area with respect to determining percentages, chances and probabilities when given a problem to solve. Six (6) teachers (26%) expressed similar sentiments about calculations. Regarding ratios, one teacher said: learners are unable to find ratios especially when figures are given. On probabilities another teacher respondent stated, learners fail to calculate probability of occurrence of progenies. 3..3 Genetic terms: This area was identified as being difficulty to learn by students (22%). They indicated that they had difficulties mastering the meaning of genetic terminologies. One student said I found it difficult to understand and define certain words used in genetics because some of them were similar to each other e.g. homozygous and heterozygous. Another one expressed the following sentiments What I found difficult was understanding the meaning of terms such as genotype, phenotype, homozygous black, heterozygous black, dominant, recessive. Nine () teachers (3%) also reported the same difficulties expressed by learners with regard to genetic terms. One teacher who had been teaching for 27 years stated:

4 Christopher HAAMBOKOMA The problem learners have is interpretation of key words such as phenotype, genotype, homozygous, heterozygous, dominant, recessive, gene, allele, homologous pair, haploid and diploid numbers, co-dominance and incomplete dominance. Another teacher who had been teaching biology for 2 years expressed a similar sentiment as follows most pupils do not clearly understand terms associated with genetics for example Gene, Chromosome, Allele, Alleles, Genotype etc. 3..4 Mutation: In this area, 4 students (27%) indicated that they had difficulties understanding how mutation came about. Three (3) teachers (3%) also stated that students had difficulties in understanding how mutation came about. 3..5 Mitosis and meiosis: 4 students (27%) indicated having learning difficulties in this area. Regarding the nature of difficulties, some stated that they had difficulties understanding the meaning of the terms meiosis and mitosis. For instance one student said, I could not understand what meiosis and mitosis were. Others expressed difficulties in distinguishing meiosis from mitosis while, some indicated that they were unable to master the various stages of mitosis and meiosis. One respondent who studied genetics in 2003 put it as follows The problem I had, was understanding the different phases involved in the two processes of [meiotic] cell division. The difficulties expressed by students in meiosis and mitosis were also observed by teachers (48%). One teacher said, pupils have difficulties in understanding the phases of meiosis and mitosis. 3..6 Sex- determination: In this area, 3 students (25%) reported that they had difficulties deciding whether the off spring was a male or female as well as how the X and Y-chromosomes operated to cause differences in sex. For example, one respondent who studied genetics in 2002 said, I had a problem determining whether the off spring was a girl or boy And another one said, I could not understand how the X and Y chromosomes pair themselves to produce the off spring and determine its sex. Regarding sex linkage, students indicated that they had difficulties understanding the concept of sex linkage. However, only 2 teachers (%) were of the view that students had difficulties in this area. 3..7 Variation: 4 students (8%) indicated finding this area difficult to learn. The problem they expressed was differentiating between discontinuous variations and continuous variations as the following response from a learner who studied genetics in 7 indicates. I could not distinguish the 2 types of variations. I was also mixing up examples of continuous and discontinuous variations. The difficult expressed by students in distinguishing between continuous and discontinuous was also echoed by 3 teachers (3%). For example one teacher who had been teaching biology for 27 years put it as follows The problem some students have is inability to distinguish between discontinuous and continuous variations in plants and animals, and relate these to correct examples in real life. 3..8 Co-dominance: 5 students (0%) indicated having difficulties in understanding this aspect and 4 teachers (7%) who participated in the study also identified this topic to be difficult for some students. 3.2 Contributing factors to learning difficulties With regard to what contributed to learning difficulties given above, the following factors were cited by respondents: 3.2. Inadequate Explanation: 5 students (2%) attributed their having difficulties in learning genetics to teachers inability to explain adequately during lessons. A respondent who learnt genetics in 200 put it as follows: The topic was not well presented to us to get the concepts. This is so because the teacher was not explaining well. Another respondent who studied genetics in 7 explained his having problems in learning

Nature and Causes of Learning Difficulties in Genetics at High School Level in Zambia 5 genetics as follows The teacher wasn t good at explaining. It is like he too did not understand the topic. Because of the teacher being mixed up in his explanations, I too got mixed up and could neither understand nor follow his lessons. Eight (8) teacher (34%) respondents also agreed with sentiments expressed by some learners that some teachers did not give good explanation to students. One teacher who had been teaching biology for over 20 years expressed his opinion as follows Some biology teachers are not conversant with the correct use of the language of genetics. So they find it difficult to explain key words. Therefore, students do not get adequate and effective explanations necessary to enhance understanding. 3.2.2 Topic not taught: Another reason given by students (8%) was that the topic was not taught to them. One respondent who studied genetics in 200 said, We were not taught the topic but instead we were let to read on our own from the given notes without any explanation. One teacher explained why some teachers did not teach the topic as follows: Teachers themselves do not know the subject matter because in colleges the topic is either not taught or not properly taught to trainee teachers hence teachers tend to shun the topic when they go into schools for fear of embarrassing themselves in front of pupils. 3.2.3 Speed of lesson presentation: The fast rate, at which some teachers presented lessons on genetics, was given by 0 students (20%) as a reason for their finding it difficult to learn it. For example one male respondent who did genetics in 7 said, The teacher was too fast, I was not accorded the chance to take my time in learning the things I had heard for the first time. Another respondent who studied genetics in 2002 put it as follows The teacher was too fast when teaching the topic making it difficult for me to grasp everything. 3.2.4 Unfriendly Teachers: In this respect, 3 students (6%) stated that some teachers never liked to be asked questions by learners on issues pupils did not understand during the lesson. The following response from one respondent who studied genetics in 2 illustrates this The unfriendly nature of the teacher made us fear to ask questions for clarifications. Another respondent who studied genetics in 7 put it as follows The teacher got emotional when we said we did not understand certain concepts. 3.2.5 Scheduling of the topic: Teaching of genetics, few weeks before writing the final grade 2 examination was given by 8 students (6%) as a factor which made it difficult for them to master the topic. One respondent, who studied the topic under consideration in 200, had this to say The topic was taught nearly at the end of the year when the examinations were around the corner and by that time most of us had lost concentration to learn. Another respondent who studied genetics in 2003 put it as follows The topic was introduced so late. The late introduction of the topic made me to lose concentration in it because I was busy preparing for the examination. Nine () teachers (3%) also expressed similar sentiments. One teacher who has been teaching biology for 2 years said Genetics is taught at the end when pupils are about to write their examination so pupils have no enough time to read and understand the many new terms and definitions they have learnt. 3.2.6 Inadequate time: Another factor expressed by 4 students (8%) was that the time allocated to the teaching and learning of genetics was too short and this made it difficult to learn the topic well. 3.2.7 Negative attitude: 6 students (2%) indicated that they had a belief that genetics was a difficult topic and that this made them not to put any effort in learning the topic. One respondent who studied genetics in 2002 put it as follows I had a negative attitude towards genetics because senior pupils commented that it was difficult. So even before I learnt the topic, my mind was closed. Another respondent who studied genetics in 3 said: The teacher was very good but I had it in mind that it was a difficult topic to understand because every one was talking about it. So from the start, I never liked it. I never used to study the topic and I even cancelled every question on genetics before the examination

6 Christopher HAAMBOKOMA Seven (7) teachers (30%) also indicated that pupils had a perception that genetics was a difficult topic to learn even before they were taught and therefore, never concentrated when they were being taught. One teacher put it as follows: Before they come to learn genetics, most pupils have the prejudice notion that it is very tough. This makes a pupil lose interest in the topic especially when they are told that no matter how much they will try, they will not succeed. 3.2.8 Discouragement from teachers: Some students reported that some teachers were not encouraging when it came to learning genetics. Instead they were told that the topic was difficult. One respondent said, the teacher threatened us that this topic was difficult. Due to threats by the teacher that it was difficult, I took it as a difficult topic. A similar sentiment was expressed by a teacher Students are often discouraged by some teachers who tell them that genetics is difficult. 3.2. Poor mathematical knowledge: Another factor given by 5 teachers (22%) for learners having difficulties in genetics was their inability to carry out mathematical calculations involving probability. For example, one teacher who had been teaching biology for 24 years said poor mathematical background of some pupils makes it difficult for them to change the four possible combinations to percentages. 3.2.0 Lack of learning resources: 5 students (0%) cited lack of appropriate reading material as a factor, which contributed to learning difficulties in genetics. One student gave the following response Since there were no detailed books to go through after the lessons, I was finding it difficult to grasp the meaning of some terms. Related to the issue of textbooks, 4 teachers (7%) indicated that the textbooks available were generally written in difficult language and hence students found it difficult to understand genetics. Nine () teachers (3%) observed that lack of teaching and learning aids such as video tapes, computer programmes, charts etc to illustrate what was being taught was a hindrance to learning of genetics. For example one teacher said Lack of suitable teaching aids for use in the teaching of genetics makes learning unrealistic, boring and creates no desirable impact on the mind of the pupils. 3.2. Lack of practical activities: Another factor cited by 4 teachers was that no practical activities were usually done when learning this topic as a result, pupils had difficulties understanding in that they were not actively involved in the learning process. For example one said Since the topic is mainly taught theoretically the concepts do not get retained for a longer time unlike if experiments were done. 3.2.2 Unfamiliar topic: 4 teachers (7%) indicated that learners met the topic for the first time in grade 2 unlike some topics in biology which they had covered in the lower grades, making it difficult for them to understand it quickly. One said genetics is only introduced in grade 2. Pupils do not meet anything related before that time. 3.2.3 Too many terms: Some students indicated that there were too many new and similar terms in the topic, which confused them. They cited terms such as phenotype, genotype, heterozygous, homozygous, allele, alleles etc. 4. Discussion The study set out to investigate the nature and causes of learning difficulties in genetics at high school level. From the responses given by students and teachers it is clear that the majority of respondents regarded genetics as a difficult topic to learn. This confirms findings of earlier studies (MOE, 4; Haambokoma and Mwale, 8; Haambokoma et.al 2002). Areas identified as being difficulty included genetic crosses, genetic terms, mitosis and meiosis, mutation and sex-determination. The study revealed a number of factors which students and teachers who participated in the study, thought

Nature and Causes of Learning Difficulties in Genetics at High School Level in Zambia 7 made it difficult to learn genetics. One of the factors cited is the inability of some teachers to explain certain aspects of genetics adequately to learners. Lack of proper explanation makes it difficult for students to comprehend the topic. One possible reason for teachers not being able to explain could be that they do not understand the topic well possibly because their background is poor in this topic. Extent of mastery of the topic has a major influence on the quality of explanation a teacher can give to students (Hashweh, 87). Another factor, which came through, was that some students were not taught this topic. One reason for this is that some teachers are not comfortable teaching this topic and therefore they deliberately omit it. Others push the topic towards the end of grade 2. When time comes to teach it, they simply tell students to read on their own because examinations are near. When a topic ( like genetics ) is not taught to students, it becomes difficult for them to learn it on their own without guidance (Brophy and Good, 86; Hiebert ; National Research Council, 2000). Fast pace of lesson presentation by some teachers was also another factor cited by learners. When a topic like genetics is presented too fast, students especially slow ones experience difficulties following the lessons and hence loss the interest to learn the topic (Reece and Walker, 7).Further more, new information given to students too quickly is not retained because it cannot be processed by the short-term memory (Petty, 3). It would appear that teachers did not allocate adequate time to teaching of genetics and this had a negative effect on students learning of the topic. Some studies indicate that reducing the amount of instructional time and particularly the amount of time students are involved in the learning activities lowers learning achievement (Denham and Lieberman, 80; Marzano, 2000; Scheerens and Bosker, 7). Scheduling of genetics towards the end of grade 2 was also cited to have contributed to students having difficulties in understanding this topic. The major reason for this is that the concentration of students during lessons is low because of pending examinations. They concentrate much more on thinking about the coming examination than on what they are being taught. Concentration on the topic being taught is an important pre-requisite to learning what is being taught. The unfriendly attitudes of some teachers, towards students when teaching this topic also make it difficult for learners to understand. For example some teachers did not allow learners to seek clarification on issues they did not understand possibly, for fear of failing to respond correctly to questions asked yet; allowing students to ask the teacher questions helps them to understand (Reece and Walker, 7). Asking questions is an important part of the learning process (Petty, 3) and contributes to learning. Other teachers tell students that the topic is difficult and thus discourage them from putting effort to learn the topic because of what they have been told by the teacher. Another contributing factor cited by some respondents was that some students come to lessons on genetics with a negative attitude towards the topic. Hence no matter how much a teachers tries such pupils do not make efforts to understand what is being taught. When learners have no interest in a topic, they tend to pursue it with less eagerness and persistence (Maqsud, 2). Positive attitude towards a topic is an important pre-requisite to learning it (Reece and Walker, 7). 5. Conclusion and recommendations The study has revealed aspects of high school genetic in which students have difficulties understanding. The study has also established that causes of difficulties include inadequate explanations, topic not taught in some cases, quick presentation of lessons, some unfriendly teachers to pupils, inappropriate scheduling of the topic, negative attitude of some learners towards the topic, poor mathematical background of some students. In view of the findings presented above, the following recommendations are made: () Institutions training teachers of biology must ensure that trainee teachers cover appropriate genetics content adequately and

8 Christopher HAAMBOKOMA are taught appropriate methodologies to enable them teach this topic with confidence. (2) Heads of science departments in high schools must ensure that adequate time is allocated to teaching and learning of genetics in the scheme of work. (3) Genetics should not be taught in the third term of grade 2 so that students attention is not divided between learning genetics and thinking of the final examination. (4) Teachers should use participatory teaching methods and pace their lessons in such away that students can follow. (5) Teachers should be encouraging, friendly and open to questions from students during lessons on genetics. (6) Textbook writers should ensure that biology textbooks meant for high schools cover genetics adequately in a way students can understand. (7) Teachers must give adequate explanations to students using visual aids, practical activities and relating things taught to real life situations. (8) The law of segregation and independent assortment must be covered to avoid students having difficulties in areas such as sex determination and variations. Overall, teachers need further training in teaching genetics and in this case, lesson study approach could be more appropriate. This approach has been used in Japan to improve the quality of teaching (Baba and Kojima, 2004) and it is being introduced in other countries like United States of America (Wang-Iverson, 2002) because of its merits. References Baba,T. and Kojima, M. (2004), Lesson study. In JICA (2004), The history of Japan s educational development: What implications can be drawn for developing countries today, Tokyo, JICA. pp. 225-234. Banet, E., and Ayuso, E. (2000), Teaching genetics at secondary school: Strategy for teaching about the location of inheritance information. Science Education, 84, 33-35. Brophy, J. E., and Good, T. L. (86). Teacher behaviour and Student Achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed. ), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3 rd ed.) (pp. 328-375). New York: Macmillan Curriculum Development Centre (2000), Biology High School Syllabus, Lusaka, Curriculum Development Centre. Denham, C., and Lieberman, A. (Eds.) (80). Time to Learn. Washington, D.C: National Institute of Education, U.S. Department of Education Examination Council of Zambia (8), School Certificate and GCE Examiners Reports for October/November 6/7 Examinations, Lusaka: ECZ Haambokoma, C. and Mwale, R. (8). Research Report on Biology Teachers Training needs (unpublished Research Report). Haambokoma et al. (2002). Strengthening of mathematics and science education in Zambian secondary schools: Baseline study report, Lusaka, JICA- Zambia. Hashweh, M. (87) Effects of Subject matter knowledge in the teaching of biology and Physics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, 0-20. Hiebert, J. (). Relationships Between Research and the NCTM Standards. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30 (I): 3-. Howie, J. S. (2003). Language and other background factors affecting secondary pupils performance in Mathematics in South Africa. African Journal of Research in SMT Education, 7, -7. INSET Curriculum Review Committee (2002). Report on SMASSE Inset Curriculum Review, 3 st January, 2002, Nairobi, SMASSE. Maqsud, M. (2). Importance of Socio-personal variables in training mathematics teachers. Paper Presented at the th Teacher Education Conference, University of North West. Marzano, R. J. (2000). A new Era of School Reform: Going where the Research Takes us. Aurora, Co: Mid-continent. Research on Education and Learning

Nature and Causes of Learning Difficulties in Genetics at High School Level in Zambia Ministry of Education (4), AIEMS Module 3 Science, Lusaka: MOE. Moll, M. B., and Allen, R.D. (87). Student difficulties with Mendelian genetics problems. The American Biology Teacher, 4, 22-233. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press Petty, G. (3) Teaching Today: A practical Guide, Cheltenham, Stanley Thornes (Publishers) Ltd. Reece, I. And Walker, S. (7), Teaching, training and learning, 3 rd Edition, Sunderland, Business ducation Publishers Ltd. Rugumayo, E. B. (78) An investigation of the Resources and Materials for the Teaching of Biology in Zambian Secondary Schools (unpublished Research Report). Scheerens, J., and Bosker, R. J. (7). The Foundations of Educational Effectiveness. New York: Elsevier Smith, M. U. (88). Successful and unsuccessful problem solving classical genetic pedigrees. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 4-433. Stewart, J. (82). Difficulties experienced by high school students when learning basic Mendelian genetics. The American Biology Teacher, 44 (2), 80-84, 8. Stewart, J. (83). Student problem solving in high school genetics. Science Education, 67, 523-540. Tsui, C. and Treagust, D. F. (2002). A preservice Science Teacher s Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK): The Story of Linda. A paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE) Conference Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, -5 December 2002 [online] : http://cc.msncache.com/ Wang-Iverson, P. (2002). Why lesson study. A paper presented at the lesson study conference, 2002. [Online]: http://www.rbs.org/lesson-study/conference/2002/papers/wang.shtml Zambia National Commission for UNESCO () A Report of the national TrainingWorkshop for Organisers of Science Camps/Clinics for Girls held atibisgardens, Zambia 5- August. (unpublished workshop report). (2007.2.23 受 理 )

Article TFP and Production Factors over the Post-War Period in Japan's Macro Economy* Masaru ICHIHASHI Associate Professor Graduate School for International Development and Cooperation, Hiroshima University -5- Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima, 73-852, Japan E-mail: ichi@hiroshima-u.ac.jp Abstract This paper analyzes factors in the transition of production and the situation of productivity including (Total Factor Productivity) TFP using Japanese macro time series economic data from 55 to 2000. Labor productivity in the overall Japanese economy slowly declined during the 0s, yet TFP did not decline during the same period. These changes were measured using both the Total Cost approach and Solow's residuals, adjusted by the operating ratio of equipment. We found that the real reasons for Japan's slower growth rate during the 0s were negative growth of capital and labor. The primary cause was a decline in the distribution of capital, which negatively affected the operating ratio and the growth rate of capital stock on the capital side, while also decreasing both labor hours and employees on the labor side. This corresponds with declining investment on the demand side as a factor in recession. Keywords : Macro economy, capital stock, productivity, TFP, Solow's residuals Introduction This paper analyzes factors in the transition of production and overall productivity including TFP using Japanese time series macroeconomic data from 55 to 2000. There are several perspectives regarding Japan's long recession. The first states that supply side changes caused the long recession. Continued low productivity during the 0s could not support Japanese economic growth. Representative of this view is Hayashi and Prescott (2002). Another perspective is that a shortage of demand within the business cycle actually caused the recession, as cited by Iwata and Miyakawa (2003). Other perspectives on the long Japanese recession are available from Hamada and Horiuchi (2004), Kobayashi and Kato (200), and Noguchi and Tanaka (200). In Japan, collusion in the construction industry, large bankruptcies in the field of distribution, and bad-debt disposal in monetary institutions had the most adverse effect on investment. It is logical to focus next on the problem of productivity and effectiveness in those sectors because declining investment there may be * I'd like to appreciate anonymous comments of this journal. Mistakes still remained are all owed to me, of course. Journal of International Development and Cooperation, Vol.3, No., 2007, pp. -27

2 Masaru ICHIHASHI structural and therefore, not suitable to updated change. Consequently, we would also like to analyze the supply side situation in Japan through the analysis of productivity. TFP (Total Factor Productivity) is crucial in this analysis. Previous research on Japanese TFP noted declines during the 0s (Kawai and Inui (2003)), Hayashi and Prescott (2002), and Iwata and Miyakawa (2003). Recently, Morana (2004) supported supply side reform by using VECM, noting common trends in productivity and labor supply. Also, Miyao (2004), along with Hamada and Horiuchi (2004), pointed out the tendency for decline in productivity by TFP when excluding linear trends on the monetary side. Shinozaki (2003) indicated TFP was in a slight decline during the 0s in an analysis on information-related industries in Japan. In contrast, Kamada and Masuda (200) and Kawai and Inui (2003) have found different TFP results. This can be explained by a kind of residuals of measurement due to the quality of the economic data. Results depend on the quality and type of statistics, the adjustment of the operating ratio of production equipment, and the changing quality of labor. Kawamoto (2004) and others reported that the true TFP or progress rate of technology was not declining during the 0s after adjustment of the operating ratio and the quality of labor. Going even further, Inui and Kwon (2004) said TFP in services was rising rather than declining. The following problems still exist though the different result of TFP variation is reported in the previous research above. First, the measurement period is not consistent. Some measurements are used ones from middle in 70s as 70s TFP and other is used one from middle in 80s as 80s TFP. It can be said that it is a rough estimate that assumes the mean value of a decade except some specific years. Secondarily, some measurements are not modified capital contribution with operating ratio. However, capital contribution must be overestimate without modification by business cycle index during recession period. Thirdly, there is not much research of examining how influent the change of the distribution rate gives TFP. This paper is going to contribute to some points as follows; First, we analyzed the productivity change during 46 years in postwar period constantly by unified data from 46 to 2000. Secondarily, we examined to include the change in the capital operating and the distribution rate for estimation of the change of TFP. Thirdly, we tried to use and examine net fixed assets as capital in macro not so used by the previous research. The second section discusses the transition of labor productivity and capital stock. This includes a discussion of problems in capital stock data. In the third section we will see the measurement result of TFP and the components and tendencies of individual TFP. We will follow these discussions with brief concluding remarks. 2 Changes in Labor Productivity and Capital stock First, let us examine the characteristics of real production per capita, that is labor productivity, Yi yi =, i =,2, L,46 during the past 46 years in postwar Japan. References are Table and Table2. L i Briefly, these tables indicate the following: Real estate, petroleum, coal products, electricity, and private gas and water supply maintained high labor productivity through the 46 postwar years. Electrical machinery, equipment, and supplies rapidly rose in labor productivity since the middle 80s.

TFP and Production Factors over the Post-War Period in Japan's Macro Economy 3 Real GDP per capita appeared to decline slowly. In contrast, labor productivity in manufacturing tended to rise slowly. Textiles, however, declined since the 80s. Agriculture, forestry and fishing have had lower labor productivity throughout the postwar period 2. Labor productivity in government services is declining slowly 3. It is obvious that the productivity of service activities and construction has tended to decline. In addition, wholesale and retail trade remains at lower labor productivity. In the end, labor productivity in manufacturing remains high except for a few sectors, and service-related sectors are generally low in productivity in Japan. Specifically, wholesale and retail trade, service activities, and construction employ large numbers of workers, but have lower productivity. Achieving greater productivity in those sectors may be an ongoing problem in Japan since they usually have lower productivity due to large numbers of workers. Table : Labor Productivity (real production per capita at price of 0) : Billion Yen Labor Productivity(Billion Yen/person) 80 85 0 Petroleum and coal products 60.07 Petroleum and coal products 24.77 Petroleum and coal products 63.023 Real estate 533.52 Real estate 54.32 Real estate 4.04 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 27.205 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 263.82 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 27.403 Iron and steel 43.554 Chemicals 2.380 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 223.386 Mining 0.54 Iron and steel 20.77 Chemicals 3.025 Food products and beverages 7.028 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 8.02 Iron and steel 52.383 Public administration 72.833 Mining 88.54 Finance and insurance 6.02 Chemicals 72.08 Public administration 8.748 Mining 0.0 Producers of government services 72.000 Finance and insurance 80.54 Transport equipment 02.058 Education, medical services and research 7.07 Producers of government services 80.03 Public administration 6.075 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 70.327 Education, medical services and research 77.284 Producers of government services 4.342 Finance and insurance 62.238 Food products and beverages 75.36 Pulp, paper and paper products 0.46 Pulp, paper and paper products 60.865 Pulp, paper and paper products 74.73 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 82.50 Tranport and communications 54.65 Machinery 73.238 Education, medical services and research 80.3 Construction 52.67 Tranport and communications 66.887 Machinery 80.06 Manufacturing 52.27 Manufacturing 63.68 Tranport and communications 80.028 Transport equipment 5.58 Transport equipment 5.45 Manufacturing 7.575 Machinery 50.670 Precision instruments 5.73 Food products and beverages 73.668 Private non-profit services 50.533 Non-metallic mineral products 5.03 Non-metallic mineral products 72.57 Whole country 4.53 Whole country 56.0 Construction 70.00 Service activities 43.462 Construction 54.627 Whole country 66. Non-metallic mineral products 40.55 Private non-profit services 54.37 Precision instruments 65.868 Others 38.7 Fabricated metal products 4.24 Fabricated metal products 60.84 Precision instruments 38.2 Service activities 48.58 Private non-profit services 56.30 Wholesale and retail trade 36.007 Others 47.45 Wholesale and retail trade 52.825 Fabricated metal products 33.7 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 45.77 Others 50.687 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 26.50 Wholesale and retail trade 38.43 Service activities 48.867 Textiles 26.042 Textiles 24.52 Textiles 28.744 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 2.263 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 5.743 Agriculture,forestry and fishing.38 5 2000 Petroleum and coal products 055.37 Petroleum and coal products 265.530 Real estate 533.763 Real estate 53.805 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 270.703 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 350.0 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 264.74 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 3.086 Chemicals 22.84 Chemicals 234.80 Iron and steel 55.72 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 232.3 Finance and insurance 4.6 Iron and steel 78.28 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 25.38 Finance and insurance 63.362 Transport equipment 07.88 Transport equipment 26.624 Public administration 02.63 Manufacturing 6.758 Producers of government services 02.476 Producers of government services 6.35 Manufacturing 8.2 Public administration 4.07 Education, medical services and research 86.773 Mining 8.837 Tranport and communications 85.70 Education, medical services and research 7.80 Pulp, paper and paper products 85.38 Pulp, paper and paper products 2.444 Mining 8.035 Tranport and communications 0.232 Non-metallic mineral products 78.830 Non-metallic mineral products 8.726 Food products and beverages 78.76 Private non-profit services 78.28 Machinery 75.30 Precision instruments 75.284 Whole country 6.53 Machinery 74.636 Fabricated metal products 65.562 Food products and beverages 73.702 Wholesale and retail trade 65.408 Whole country 73.022 Precision instruments 65.35 Others 72.558 Private non-profit services 5.484 Fabricated metal products 65.4 Construction 53.00 Wholesale and retail trade 6.376 Others 5.758 Construction 4.82 Service activities 46.854 Service activities 4.605 Textiles 38.047 Textiles 38.060 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 8.222 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 8.370 Note:Data source is NEEDS Database in 2002. Next we will consider capital with fixed assets on balance sheets since we can view assets and liabilities by using stock tables in SNA. Please note that market price data is based directly on B/S due to the lack of an adequate deflator for

4 Masaru ICHIHASHI each asset 4. Theoretically, an increase in capital stock must correspond with investment in that period I, so the amounts of net fixed capital formation (gross fixed capital formation - t = K t = K t K t consumption) in the Integrated account (Flow table) equals the net fixed capital formation in the Capital Finance Account (Stock table) 5. Also, changes in financial assets in the Capital Finance Account in the Stock table are consistent with Financial transactions in Capital Finance Accounts by institutional sector in the Flow tables 6. We used five asset items here: net fixed assets, inventories, tangible non-produced assets 7, financial assets, and corporate shares 8 and three types of liabilities--liabilities, corporate shares, and net worth (national wealth). Calculating a correlation coefficient matrix between assets and liabilities with the data above, significant relationships were shown in net worth and tangible non-producible assets, financial assets and liabilities except shares, and corporate shares and shares in liabilities. The result is shown in Table 3. All coefficients were recorded at over 0.. This result means that net worth or national wealth mainly Table 2: Labor Productivity (real production per capita at price of 0) 2: Billion Yen Labor Productivity(Billion Yen/person) 55 60 65 Real estate 85.620 Real estate 000.000 Real estate 608.76 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 82. Petroleum and coal products 4. Petroleum and coal products 333.57 Petroleum and coal products 5.74 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 67.7 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 6.45 Public administration 58.43 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 66.80 Education, medical services and research 55.208 Producers of government services 53.8 Public administration 53.77 Producers of government services 53.47 Education, medical services and research 46.628 Producers of government services 5.27 Public administration 52.65 Private non-profit services 44.238 Education, medical services and research 4.02 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 5.4 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 42.8 Private non-profit services 43.75 Private non-profit services 46.847 Food products and beverages 24.75 Service activities 2.537 Construction 32.2 Service activities 23.224 Construction 26.64 Food products and beverages 3.66 Construction 20.70 Food products and beverages 24.8 Service activities 30.232 Iron and steel 5.4 Tranport and communications 20.580 Iron and steel 27.02 Tranport and communications 3.578 Iron and steel 8.256 Tranport and communications 26.87 Finance and insurance 2.37 Whole country 5.3 Finance and insurance 25.58 Whole country.75 Finance and insurance 4.236 Whole country 22.500 Others 0.23 Others 3.8 Mining 2.30 Manufacturing.03 Manufacturing.82 Others 20.034 Mining 7.065 Mining.403 Pulp, paper and paper products.458 Non-metallic mineral products 6.06 Pulp, paper and paper products 0.65 Non-metallic mineral products.067 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 5.2 Non-metallic mineral products 0.374 Manufacturing 8.024 Textiles 4.75 Transport equipment 7.847 Fabricated metal products 4.522 Fabricated metal products 4.337 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 6.827 Transport equipment 3.8 Pulp, paper and paper products 4.2 Machinery 6.823 Machinery.24 Wholesale and retail trade 3.84 Fabricated metal products 6.772 Wholesale and retail trade 0.46 Transport equipment 3.42 Textiles 6.428 Textiles.64 Machinery 2.4 Wholesale and retail trade 6.04 Chemicals 8.73 Chemicals.72 Chemicals 4.02 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 8.360 Precision instruments.3 Precision instruments 3.085 Precision instruments 6.285 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 0.635 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies.274 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 2.47 70 75 Petroleum and coal products 62.668 Petroleum and coal products 765.248 Real estate 47.77 Real estate 532.08 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 70.600 Electricity, gas and water supply(private) 87.0 Iron and steel 7.05 Iron and steel 82.635 Education, medical services and research 63.32 Food products and beverages 76.5 Producers of government services 60.206 Mining 66.06 Public administration 58.42 Education, medical services and research 66.20 Food products and beverages 56.74 Producers of government services 63.84 Construction 53.376 Public administration 62.545 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 53.302 Electricity, gas and water supply(public) 55.474 Tranport and communications 48.86 Tranport and communications 55.30 Mining 48.70 Construction 55.284 Private non-profit services 45.003 Finance and insurance 50.33 Service activities 40.464 Pulp, paper and paper products 4.32 Non-metallic mineral products 3.036 Private non-profit services 4.24 Pulp, paper and paper products 35.52 Whole country 4.72 Whole country 34.677 Service activities 40.786 Finance and insurance 34.026 Manufacturing 3.046 Manufacturing 3.07 Transport equipment 38.88 Transport equipment 3.708 Non-metallic mineral products 36.72 Others 3.06 Others 3.77 Fabricated metal products 24.8 Chemicals 2.27 Machinery 24.830 Machinery 27.537 Chemicals 2.4 Wholesale and retail trade 25.20 Wholesale and retail trade 8.5 Fabricated metal products 24.78 Textiles 4.83 Textiles 2.84 Precision instruments.53 Precision instruments 7.630 Agriculture,forestry and fishing.084 Agriculture,forestry and fishing 2.7 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies 2.507 Electrical machinery, equipment and supplies.567 Note:Data source is NEEDS Database in 2002.

TFP and Production Factors over the Post-War Period in Japan's Macro Economy 5 affects tangible non-producible fixed assets such as land, forests and fisheries. In other words, non-reproducible tangible assets have a greater effect on net worth than on net fixed assets and inventories. We can see that not only financial assets affect liabilities except corporate shares, and also corporate shares affect equity financing. These results are reasonable because credit and debt in the entire country correspond with one another. Table 3: correlation between Assets and Liabilities Net fixed assets Inventories Tangible non-produced assets Financial assets Shares Liabilities 0.764 0.275 0.3 0. 0.887 Shares 0.8748 0.872 0.42 0.8435 0.78 Net worth(national wealth) 0.802 0.634 0.03 0.52 0.54 Note:Data souce is NEEDS Database in 2002. Net fixed assets in Closing balance sheet account. Next, we would like to break down the growth rate of the stock data above by the degree of contribution. The growth rate of aggregation of Y t, closing assets, can be expressed as a weighted summation of the growth rate of the components X. The result of the breakdown of the growth rate of stock () is seen on Table 4. it n Y ˆ = w ˆ t =,2, L, T () t i= it X it, Table 4: Decomposition of growth rate of capital stock by Contribution degree Net fixed assets Inventories Tangible non-produced assets Financial assets Shares Closing assets Liabilities Shares Net worth(national wealth) Closing liabilities plus net worth 56 3.28%.388% 4.327% 7.52% 0.700% 7.305% 8.088% 0.66% 8.553% 7.30% 57 0.7%.05% 3.87% 6.543% 0.637% 3.35% 6.8% 0.640% 5.600% 3.3% 58 0.6% 0.205% 4.24% 6.55% 0.50%.648% 6.3% 0.456% 4.73%.648% 5.80% 0.25% 4.74% 8.3% 0.522% 6.82% 8.85% 0.467% 7.655% 6.82% 60 2.33% 0.844% 8.203% 8.84% 0.75% 20.88% 8.806% 0.700%.483% 20.8% 6 4.48%.200% 6.546% 0.63%.062% 23.54%.23% 0.0%.570% 23.54% 62 2.222% 0.482% 5.782% 8.45% 0.68% 7.32% 8.32% 0.65% 8.376% 7.32% 63 2.586% 0.64% 3.032% 0.466% 0.487% 7.22% 0.723% 0.437% 6.052% 7.22% 64 2.6% 0.640% 4.62% 8.25% 0.530% 6.66% 8.325% 0.53% 7.840% 6.67% 65.56% 0.506% 2.45% 7.52% 0.087% 2.52% 7.785% 0.47% 5.0% 2.52% 66 2.783% 0.588% 4.46% 8.225% 0.65% 6.77% 8.046% 0.0% 7.4% 6.77% 67 3.064% 0.764% 5.666%.282% 0.25% 8.0%.27% 0.42%.48% 8.0% 68 2.666% 0.77% 6.626% 8.025% 0.207% 8.242% 7.45% 0.5% 0.38% 8.242% 6 3.437% 0.746% 6.834%.745% 5.80% 26.57%.28% 6.28%.55% 26.572% 70 4.034% 0.553% 6.73% 8.32% -0.835% 8.255% 8.56% -0.87% 0.70% 8.254% 7 3.3% 0.42% 6.043% 8.546%.073% 8.43% 8.26%.33%.54% 8.43% 72 4.626% 0.367%.85% 0.765% 5.052% 32.75% 0.444% 5.3% 7.57% 32.75% 73 6.356% 0.28% 8.8%.70% 0.420% 26.32%.804% 0.354% 6.55% 26.32% 74 4.42% 0.736% 0.% 5.56% -0.886% 0.40% 6.0% -0.32% 5.232% 0.40% 75 2.00% 0.0% 2.067% 6.540% -0.26% 0.600% 6.553% -0.03% 4.40% 0.600% 76 3.035% 0.248%.87% 6.7%.246% 3.45% 6.634%.276% 5.235% 3.45% 77 2.037% 0.04%.84% 5.57% -0.038%.45% 5.38% -0.073% 4.24%.45% 78 2.24% 0.022% 3.57% 6.522%.666% 4.02% 6.42%.680% 5.37% 4.02% 7 3.25% 0.444% 5.2% 5.538% 0.577% 4.40% 5.658% 0.583% 8.6% 4.40% 80 2.40% 0.288% 4.86% 5.475% 0.02% 3.34% 5.522% 0.7% 7.432% 3.34% 8.433% 0.06% 3.674% 4.843% 0.434% 0.453% 4.766% 0.52% 5.57% 0.452% 82.7% 0.052%.82% 4.286% -0.55% 7.282% 4.32% -0.20% 3.26% 7.282% 83 0.778% -0.037%.06% 4.350%.020% 7.27% 4.4%.57%.46% 7.27% 84.047% 0.036%.2% 4.282%.264% 7.75% 4.04%.256% 2.453% 7.75% 85 0.855% -0.0% 2.28% 4.72%.067% 8.822% 4.344%.077% 3.40% 8.822% 86 0.63% -0.03% 6.48% 4.786% 3.375% 5.86% 4.65% 3.456% 7.035% 5.86% 87 0.66% -0.005%.64% 5.472% 2.65% 7.762% 5.486% 2.085% 0.% 7.762% 88 0.52% 0.037% 3.88% 4.48% 3.673% 2.268% 4.42% 3.648% 4.0% 2.268% 8.408% 0.08% 4.% 4.240% 3.685% 4.44% 4.043% 3.865% 6.506% 4.44% 0 0.652% 0.545% 3.03% 6.330% -5.37% 6.058% 6.6% -5.3% 5.280% 6.058% 0.86% 0.02% -2.258% 2.50% -0.70% 0.0% 2.406% -0.7% -.2% 0.0% 2 0.537% -0.0% -2.634%.477% -.725% -2.355%.27% -.772% -.880% -2.355% 3 0.363% -0.068% -.54%.735% 0.355%.23%.50% 0.437% -0.76%.23% 4 0.23% -0.03% -0.735%.587% 0.54% 2.060%.56%.0% -0.475% 2.060% 5 0.2% -0.004% -.027% 2.36% -0.067%.66%.6% 0.036% -0.83%.66% 6 0.437% 0.02% -0.4%.472% -0.50%.08%.5% -0.45% 0.282%.08% 7 0.443% 0.05% -0.474% 2.443% -0.728%.6% 2.24% -0.7% 0.24%.6% 8-0.046% -0.064% -0.85% 0.88% -0.73% -0.800% 0.7% -0.734% -0.866% -0.800% -0.025% -0.046% -0.80% 0.55% 2.45% 2.488% 0.826% 3.204% -.542% 2.488% 2000 0.45% -0.02% -0.787% 0.623% -.073% -.3% 0.374% -.388% -0.0% -.3% 200-0.0% -0.057% -.043% -0.053% -.070% -2.33% -0.44% -.227% -0.664% -2.33% Note:Data souce is NEEDS Database in 2002. Net fixed assets in Closing balance sheet account. Here, ˆ t, X ˆ are growth rate individually. ˆ ˆ it t : = Yt / Yt, X it : = X it / X it Y Y. wit is weight of X it on Y t and then w : X / Y. it = it t This table has the following features: First, the growth rate of closing assets was very high during the rapid growth period prior to the oil crisis in 73. Second, net fixed assets did not contribute significantly. Third,

6 Masaru ICHIHASHI corporate shares as assets and inventories have consistently made small contributions. Fourth, the growth rate of closing assets in the 0s enters into a low growth rate period due to falling tangible non-producible assets. In contrast, financial assets except shares were up in the 0s, with total corporate shares rising in late 0s. Fifth, net fixed assets, inventories, and shares as assets did not significantly contribute to the growth rate of closing assets in the 0s. Sixth, net worth and liabilities in closing liabilities plus net worth were high until the 0s. Seventh, the low growth rate of closing liabilities in the 0s was affected by the contribution of liabilities but the negative contribution of net worth in the early 0s. Also, the contribution of corporate shares as equity finance affected the growth rate negatively in the late 0s. Traditionally, the role of assets in the Japanese economy has been mainly affected by tangible non-producible assets and financial assets, but lately the role of corporate shares has become more important. This tendency began with the boom period of the late 80s, called Bubble economy but it later became a permanent feature of Japanese assets. As a result, the weight of indirect financing such as loans from banks backed by land mortgages will decline. Direct financing by holding shares and their operations will increase in Japan. We can see similarities in some institutional financial reforms from the late 0s, particularly the easing of restrictions on securities transactions on the Internet, a liberalization of financing that increased the total number of investors. Now we will examine the change in the capital coefficient K / Y by using net fixed assets and nominal t t GDP. That is Figure. The capital coefficient tended to decline until the late 60s, but then grew rapidly from 6 onward. It stabilized in the 80s and since the 0s, increased slowly. This means that although productivity of capital fell in the 0s, the magnitude of the decline was not serious. This also parallels the slow decline of labor productivity across the country and mirrors the low growth rate of GDP above. Comparison of the ratio of gross fixed capital 0 over GDP by flow data is visible in Figure 2. This figure shows how the fluctuating ratio had increased until 75 but then turned down slowly from then. The ratio increased again in the bubble economy, but finally declined in the 0s. Here, the tendency of the ratio of gross fixed capital to decline during the 0s indicated that a decrease in demand of investment does not necessarily fit with an increasing of capital coefficient on Figure. However, this result could be theoretically true if marginal investment were diminishing. Figure :Transition of Capital coefficient Figure 2: Ratio of Gross fixed capital over GDP 2.4 2.2 2.8.6.4.2 Capital coefficient K/GDP 55 58 6 64 67 70 73 76 7 82 85 88 4 7 2000 K/Y Note:Data source is NEEDS Database in 2002. Net fixed assets in Closing balance sheet account and GDP in SNA. 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 5% 55 58 6 Gross fixed capital/gdp(nominal) 64 67 70 73 Gross fixed capital/gdp 76 7 82 85 88 4 7 2000 Note:Data source is NEEDS Database in 2002. Gross domestic fixed capital formation in private and public sectors and GDP in SNA.