Japanese Journal of Southeast Asian Studies
Online ISSN : 2424-1377
Print ISSN : 0563-8682
ISSN-L : 0563-8682
Volume 37, Issue 1
Displaying 1-8 of 8 articles from this issue
Articles
  • A Preliminary Observation
    Mohamed Yusoff Ismail
    1999 Volume 37 Issue 1 Pages 3-17
    Published: June 30, 1999
    Released on J-STAGE: November 30, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    This paper is an attempt to describe briefly the nature of bird's nest production among the Idahan. Since ancestral time the Idahan have developed a social mechanism, based on kinship principles, to control seasonal access to rock chambers bearing the nests, and to rotate harvesting rights between various clan members. Being an ethnic minority, the Idahan operate as a closely knit corporate group insofar as bird's nesting activities are concerned. The distribution system also ensures ethnic solidarity among the Idahan. The sole benefits of the harvests can only be enjoyed by them as the sole inheritor of the nesting caves provided that they work together as a closely integrated social and economic unit.
    Download PDF (1188K)
  • The Ayala Model
    Eric Vincent C. Batalla
    1999 Volume 37 Issue 1 Pages 18-49
    Published: June 30, 1999
    Released on J-STAGE: November 30, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    This article discusses the ability of the family firm to grow for several generations by examining the case of the Ayala group in the Philippines. Such an ability, called here as generational growth, has been the subject of debate regarding the future of the family firm and the zaibatsu, which is a special type of family firm. Two features that distinguish Ayala as a model are 1) the ability of the family to maintain ownership and management control for generations and 2) the rejection of the use of political influence for rent seeking.
     An examination of Ayala's ownership-management system points to strategies employed for the preservation of the family's position within the firm. The quality and process of such preservation, which family members called stewardship, is also consistent in family and firm's political behavior. The paper proposes that the adoption of superior stewardship strategies accompanied by skillful entrepreneurship would ensure the family's continued ownership-management of the zaibatsu.
    Download PDF (2240K)
  • Kenji Suzuki, Akira Goto, Masakazu Mizutani, Vichai Sriboonlue
    1999 Volume 37 Issue 1 Pages 50-64
    Published: June 30, 1999
    Released on J-STAGE: November 30, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Northeast Thailand is the poorest zone in Thailand mainly because of the unstable rice production under rainfed condition. This study aims at evaluating quantitatively rice productive force and stability of rainfed rice cultivation in Northeast Thailand. An intensive questionnaire and hearing survey was conducted in two villages in Khon Kaen Province. As a result, it was clarified that the basis of the present rice cultivation for selfsufficiency was under a weakening trend because of the recent massive changes in socioeconomic structures. In order to evaluate stability of rice cultivation, two indices were developed and applied to each farming household in the two villages. The first index is used for evaluating stability of production level; the second one is used for evaluating stability of rice farming for self-sufficiency. Validity of the indices was examined through comparing calculated results with the data obtained from the questionnaire survey. It was found that the farming scale does not influence stability of production level, but influence stability of rice farming for self-sufficiency. “Stability distribution, ” which is obtained by combining these two indices, was adopted to evaluate the rice productive force of each farming household. The results indicated that significant gaps in the productive force among farming households exist in each village.
    Download PDF (943K)
  • Institutional Foundation of Community Forestry in Thailand
    Jin Sato
    1999 Volume 37 Issue 1 Pages 65-89
    Published: June 30, 1999
    Released on J-STAGE: November 30, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Literature on common property management has increased, particularly since the late 1980s. However, most of the studies have focused narrowly on the mechanics of sustainable resource use within the context of local organizations, without due regard to the institutional foundation set by the government. The case of Thailand shows that communally used land should be analyzed in relation to (1) national legal and policy framework over lands, and (2) agricultural land entitlements of farmers. This paper outlines the historical development of competition over forest lands and identifies the potential for communal forest use within the present administrative framework of the government. Although the economic importance of forest resources should not be denied, agriculture still remains a central source of livelihood even for those who live on forest lands. The capability of local villagers to manage a forest, the alleged target of dispute in the drafting of new Community Forestry Bill, can not be assessed properly unless people are given the productive forests in combination with land titles.
    Download PDF (2145K)
  • Focusing on the Introduction of the Thathameda Tax and the Tree Revenue
    Asuka Mizuno
    1999 Volume 37 Issue 1 Pages 90-105
    Published: June 30, 1999
    Released on J-STAGE: November 30, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    This paper is an attempt to clarify the nature of the “land revenue” of Upper Burma in the colonial period, focusing on the introduction of the thathameda tax and the tree revenue. The “land revenue” assessed in the settlement operations of Upper Burma consisted of three heads; the land revenue proper; the thathameda tax, which was by definition a tax on non-agricultural income; and the tree revenue, which was a tax on produce of toddy sugar. The latter two were actually remains of the comprehensive tax collected before the colonial period, called thathameda, and were planned to substitute land revenue proper at the beginning of the settlement operations. Moreover, they were assessed on each village, although the land revenue system of British Burma was based on the ryotwari system, under which individual cultivators were directly taxed. Why were the thathameda tax and the tree revenue introduced into the “land revenue” of Upper Burma? I argue that land revenue proper did not cover the produce from land, because the ryotwari system was not adaptable to the society of Upper Burma. So the thathameda tax and the tree revenue had to be introduced to supplement a deficit in land revenue proper.
    Download PDF (1341K)
Book Reviews
Field Report
feedback
Top