The 50th Anniversary of Japan’s 
International Cooperation Symposium: 
The View on the Japanese ODA in the 
Recipient Countries 
Minutes of Symposium 
U Thant International Conference Hall, United Nations University (UNU) 
Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Asahi Shimbun 
Date: November 15, 2004 
Venue: 
Co-Organized by: MOFA, United Nations University, JICA 
Sponsored by: Ms. Makiko Shimizu, Presenter: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for 
waiting. We are very happy to be having this Symposium to celebrate the 50th 
anniversary of Japanese Official Development Assistance (ODA), subtitled “The View 
on the Japanese ODA in the Recipient Countries.” We will now begin the Symposium. 
Before we start the Symposium, however, there are some requests we would like to 
make of you. The first has to do with cellular phones. Those of you who have cellular 
phones, please turn off the alarm on cellular phones. Towards the end of the whole 
session, we will have a question and answer session. When you want to ask a question, 
please use the microphone. There is a microphone for every three persons. If you push 
the green button, the light will be on and as soon as you finish your intervention, would 
you please turn off the green switch; in other words, to turn off the microphone? 
Ladies and gentlemen, we would now like to begin the Symposium. I am a free 
announcer called Ms. Makiko Shimizu. I shall have the privilege of serving as the 
Master of Ceremonies (MC) for today’s session. Thank you. 
Ladies and gentlemen, we are celebrating the 50th anniversary since Japan began ODA. 
This is a landmark in that sense, so we would like to look back upon half a century of 
Japanese international cooperation. We have been having various events and functions 
across Japan to commemorate this. This Symposium today is one of the main events of 
all these various functions we have been holding to commemorate the 50th anniversary. 
We would now like to begin, first of all, by having an opening address by Mr. Kazuo 
Kodama, Deputy Director-General of the Economic Cooperation Bureau of the Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs. He will also talk to us about the aims of having this Symposium. So 
sir, please. 
Mr. Kazuo Kodama, Deputy Director-General, Economic Cooperation Bureau, Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs: Thank you very much for the introduction. My name is Mr. Kodama, 
Deputy Director-General of the Economic Cooperation Bureau. As we start the 
International Cooperation Symposium, it is my pleasure to say a few words on behalf of 
the Foreign Ministry. Today, first of all, I would like to thank the co-organizers of this 
Symposium; in other words, the United Nations University (UNU) and the Japan 
International Cooperation Agency (JICA). We would like to really express our heartfelt 
gratitude, and also to Nihon Keizai Shimbun and Asahi Shimbun for supporting to 
Symposium. 
1 As it has been pointed out, on 6 October 1954, when we were still quite poor after 
World War II, Japan decided to join the Colombo Plan and thus we began the Official 
Development Assistance to developing countries. This day has been designated as the 
Day of International Cooperation, and we have been calling for understanding and 
participation on the part of the Japanese people. So we are celebrating the 50th 
anniversary since the start of ODA. These past three months and the three months 
around 6 October has been designated as the months of Japanese ODA to commemorate 
the 50th anniversary. Now, using this occasion, we would like to see the view on the 
Japanese ODA in the recipient countries mainly. 
Fifty years ago, I said that Japan was still a poor country. However, at that time, we 
were already having a discussion of this kind in the Japanese Diet. This was 18 May 
1958, and this was a question posed to the Foreign Ministry. In response to this question, 
Mr. Matsumoto from the Foreign Ministry answered this way. The question had to do 
with why Japan gives ODA to India. His answer was this: Japan is not economically or 
fiscally rich country, but they need funds in developing countries. We are not really a 
rich country, so it is not necessary for us to give any funds or ODA to other countries. 
But we are not in a position to be able to deny this ODA from the perspective of 
promoting economic diplomacy. Now, people often say that for India, it is much more 
meaningful to borrow US$50 million from Japan than US$150 million from the United 
States, which is a very rich country. In other words, contribution from a poor country is 
much more effective than contribution from a very rich country. Ever since the 
beginning of ODA, you can see that ODA has been one of the major pillars of Japanese 
diplomacy. 
Now that we look back upon the past 50 years, we must keep in mind that this is how 
we started with ODA. That was one of the main purposes of starting ODA here in Japan. 
Now in the last 50 years, Japan has done a lot. For example, since the last 50 years, we 
have sent 70,000 experts and 25,000 Japan Overseas Cooperation Volunteers (JOCV) to 
166 countries in the world. Also, we have received 275,000 trainees from 176 countries 
around the world. This was really part of the contribution to human resource 
development in the recipient countries. In the last 50 years, we have given US$221 
billion of ODA to 158 countries. In other words, this translates to 3,700 yen per person 
each year, so we are proud of Japanese ODA and that this is also highly appreciated by 
the international community. But we all know that we are really in a very tight fiscal 
2 condition and really have to keep on reducing ODA. In the last seven years, we have 
had to cut it by 30% and the Japanese people—as taxpayers—are now demanding that 
ODA have more transparency, mobility and efficiency. These are some of the demands 
that have been placed on us by the Japanese people. 
That being the case, today at this Symposium we hope that we can get some very candid 
views on Japanese ODA—its transparency, effectiveness and efficiency. Based on this 
discussion, maybe we can give some input to Japanese ODA in the next 50 years. What 
are some of the strengths and weaknesses of Japanese ODA? What are some of the 
Japanese aspects to ODA that must be maintained? What are the aspects that will have 
to be changed or reformed? If we can get some clues to these questions, I think we 
would be most happy and that will really satisfy our intention of having this Symposium. 
We are very honored to have ambassadors from four countries today: Brazil, the 
Philippines, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. We thank them for coming here. We would also 
like to thank Mr. Suganami from the Association of Medical Doctors of Asia (AMDA), 
Mr. Harada from Nihon Keizai Shimbun and Mr. Kanda from JICA. Thank you very 
much. 
Ms. Shimizu: Thank you very much. We would like to hear from Professor Yozo Yokota, 
who will be the moderator later. He will give us his opening remarks. 
Mr. Yozo Yokota, Ph.D., Special Advisor to the Rector, United Nations University: Mr. 
Kazuo Kodama, Deputy Director-General of the Economic Cooperation Bureau of the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ms. Misako Konno, United Nations Development 
Programme (UNDP) Goodwill Ambassador, panelists, commentators and Your 
Excellencies Ambassadors from different countries, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you 
very much for your kind participation in the 50th anniversary of Japan’s International 
Cooperation Symposium. Representing the UNU, which has offered this venue and on 
behalf of Rector Hans van Ginkel, who is on his business trip, I would like to say a few 
words of greeting to you. 
Japanese official development aid started 50 years ago in 1954 by joining the Colombo 
Plan after World War II. We have continued ODA since then. Japan became prosperous 
economically and Japanese ODA expanded in quantity and quality every year. In the 
1990s, its amount reached number one in the world in terms of volume. During the past 
years, due to economic recession and a tight fiscal situation, Japan has yielded its 
3 number one position to the United States. However, we are still offering ODA—more 
than 90 million yen per year. 
Japanese ODA comes in different forms. For example, grant aid through the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs, technical cooperation through JICA or loans through the Japan Bank 
for International Cooperation (JBIC). Japanese ODA is provided in different forms 
through different channels. In addition, Japanese ODA is provided through UN 
organizations including UNU, UNDP, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the World Bank. The 
purpose of economic cooperation is to help the two-thirds of the world population in 
developing countries by the advanced countries joining hands together so that the 
people in developing countries can enjoy a better and stable life. Therefore, it is very 
important that economic cooperation should be promoted under the initiatives of 
developing countries and people in developing countries. Japan, UNDP and other 
countries and organizations should help the efforts by recipient countries. Evaluation of 
Japanese ODA highly depends on the people’s view, or how the people in developing 
countries see Japanese ODA. 
Today’s theme is the view on the Japanese ODA in recipient countries and this has 
special implications. It is quite significant also that we have with us today Ambassadors 
from different regions of the world. I am very happy that we can have very fruitful 
discussions on ODA from the perspectives of developing countries. I really hope that 
through today’s Symposium, Japanese ODA will be all the more useful and helpful for 
developing countries so that they can lead better and stable lives. Thank you very much. 
Ms. Shimizu: Thank you very much. That was the opening address by Professor Yokota 
of UNU. Next, I would like to ask Ms. Misako Konno, the UNDP Goodwill 
Ambassador for a keynote speech. She is an actress. She is very well known in films, 
TV as well as on stage. She is also a prominent writer of essays. Also, she became the 
UNDP Goodwill Ambassador in 1998 and she has visited many project places. In 1999, 
she went to Cambodia and Palestine in 2000. She has also visited Ghana and other 
places. In July this year, she visited East Timor and there, again, she observed the 
projects undertaken by UNDP. She also had a meeting with President Xanana Gusmao. 
Together with the ODA monitor, she jointly took a survey of the projects undertaken by 
the Japanese government. She has many experiences of this kind and she is going to talk 
to us today starting with a videotape recording (VTR) when she visited East Timor. She 
4 will then follow with a presentation. She also visited Bhutan in 2001. 
Video Presentation, Ms. Misako Konno, UNDP Goodwill Ambassador: In July 2004, I 
visited Timor-Leste, the first nation which achieved independence in the 21st century. 
This small country, surrounded by rich nature, has gone through several conflicts for a 
long period and finally achieved peace. Like a little child who began to toddle, 
Timor-Leste has just started to make its first step forward. In the capital city Dili, I 
observed great, massive destruction everywhere. After the direct presidential election in 
1999, there was a big conflict and most of the public infrastructure was destroyed. The 
long history of conflict finally came to an end and a nation was born. However, 
reconstruction needed to be done from the very beginning. 
Education is a key element for national development. However, school buildings of the 
National University were attacked during the conflict. New equipment is being installed 
and the studying environment is gradually getting better. Many students told me that 
they are eager to do anything to contribute to their nation. In order to support women 
who lost their husbands during the conflict, a training center was set up to teach them 
how to make traditional textile fabric called tais. This lady told me that she is very 
happy because she can now send her children to school by selling tais. She showed me a 
beautiful tais which she made. 
Japan is providing ODA in the field of agriculture as well, so people can gain their food 
by themselves. Timor-Leste used to be an agricultural country, but due to the long 
conflict the land had been devastated. A man who used to be a soldier no longer holds a 
gun but holds a hoe instead and learns how to grow crops, hoping that this will help 
enrich the country in the future. In spite of sharing the same cultural background, the 
struggle for independence divided people in this country. Many lives were lost and 
conflict produced deep hatred among people. Such hatred must be removed in order to 
achieve everlasting peace. The Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation has 
listened to the voices of each individual face-to-face. It is helping to relieve the hatred. 
I thought that development aid is similar to raising children. Until a child can stand on 
his or her own feet, you need to spend enormous time and energy and wait patiently to 
see his or her growth. Most importantly, there needs to be peace. Nothing can be done 
without peace. 
5 Ms. Shimizu: So this was the VTR when Ms. Konno visited East Timor. Now let us 
welcome UNDP Goodwill Ambassador Ms. Misako Konno. 
Ms. Misako Konno, UNDP Goodwill Ambassador: Good afternoon, everyone. My 
name is Misako Konno, UNDP Goodwill Ambassador. My real job is being an actress, 
but it has already been six years since I became UNDP’s Goodwill Ambassador. I am 
not very used to this kind of very official occasion. I am a bit nervous, therefore, but I 
will try to do my best. 
Up until I became the UN Goodwill Ambassador, I had nothing to do really with the 
actual field of international cooperation, ODA and so forth. My own impression of ODA 
before I became a goodwill ambassador was from mostly television, newspapers, or the 
media in other words. When you look at the media, you see ODA being taken up very 
frequently in a negative light when there are failures. I am sure there are many 
successful cases, but the media tends to take up the failed cases. At least I used to think 
how well the Japanese ODA is actually implemented. People often criticize Japanese 
ODA as focusing attention only on infrastructure only, the so-called “white goods” such 
as buildings, or hardware, and not very much on software. 
I went to Cambodia after becoming the UNDP’s Goodwill Ambassador and there I met 
with Japanese volunteers, experts from JOCV, and some people were working in places 
where there was no electricity or running water. These people, the nurses for example, 
are doing their best in order to assist people who are in hardship from illnesses. And 
then there were teachers who were trying to teach the children, even though there were 
no really good school buildings. There were also those involved in road building or 
construction work. I felt very strongly at that time that ODA—which is a very important 
form of international cooperation—invites so many hardworking, goodwilled people, 
but their work is not very often carried in the media. The media tend to carry the bad 
news or the failures of ODA. But I was stunned to see that there are many successful 
ODA projects with hardworking people. I felt so keenly at that time, therefore, that 
people should know more about those success stories rather than the failures. 
I had similar feelings in East Timor. East Timor in 1999 had the national referendum to 
question the people whether the country should be independent or not. After the election, 
there was a big riot, almost a civil war. Dili, the capital city, and so many places were 
practically destroyed. In May 2002, it got independence, but the attention of the 
6 international community, including Japan, shifted to Iraq, and East Timor became 
forgotten once again. I think this kind of forgetfulness is part of the problem. 
This time, I worked with ODA monitors. These are general citizens, the public at large, 
who have agreed to serve as monitors. They were the ones who went to the actual ODA 
project area and would tell the people what they felt about the ODA project upon 
coming back to Japan. I think this kind of ODA monitor program is a very important 
program. I think, including myself, what is important is to be interested in what is 
happening in the way of ODA. We need to gain more ODA supporters. To become ODA 
supporters, you will have to be interested in ODA and to have a good understanding of 
ODA. In East Timor, there are many significant, meaningful ODA projects. Japan is 
very good at technical assistance and in the human resource development area. These 
two aspects impress me very much. The VTR had a part of it. 
The work of the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation, which we saw, 
was quite commendable because there was this fierce battle between those who 
supported independence and those who were against independence. But now that the 
new country was born, people agreed that they would have to direct their whole energy 
into nation building. To do that, you will have to start with reconciliation of the people 
who had been fighting against each other over the independence issue. So this particular 
commission, the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation, mediated 
between and amongst the people and listened to their voices to lead them in the 
direction of reconciliation. Now, this commission was run on the money they received 
from Japanese assistance. 
There are also the former combatants and soldiers issue. The former soldiers have to 
find new employment or more peaceful employment, for example, agricultural 
employment. You have to give them training again to have them carry the hoe instead of 
the weapons and to engage in agriculture. Also, there was work on reconstructing the 
National University of East Timor and to bring the equipment from Japan so that they 
can start using computers. This was the Institute of Technology there in East Timor. We 
need not only equipment but also people. They saw mainly the JICA people who had 
come to East Timor to give the necessary instruction or guidance for using this 
equipment. 
One of the major potential export items in East Timor is coffee. This is going to be a 
7 very useful way of getting hard currency, but they need special training and to be able to 
grow and package coffee in a way that can be sold on the international market. There, 
again, the Japanese experts will come to train them in that direction. So I see that 
Japanese ODA is being used for human resources building, which is an essential part of 
nation building, and I would like as many people as possible to know that these things 
are happening in East Timor. 
Also, in East Timor, just until very recently, there were peacekeeping operations by the 
Japanese Self-Defense Forces (SDF) and the people there are so appreciative of what 
the SDF have done. For example, there would be a major landslide and SDF personnel 
would come to mend the road. So you see this road running all the way through the 
country, and we hope that many people in Japan would know about these kinds of 
success cases of Japanese ODA programs. Even though my ability is limited, I hope to 
continue to do my best in my capacity as UNDP Goodwill Ambassador to tell the people 
about what I have seen. 
Since my time is almost up, let me just conclude by saying that there are two things that 
I felt very strongly when I was in East Timor this time. One has to do with the fact that 
since my visit there was towards the end of July this year, this was the time when Japan 
was going through an extremely hot summer and I came to East Timor from that heat 
island of Japan, and East Timor is a country that will have to start everything from 
scratch. They have to establish their own infrastructure. They must establish their legal 
system. Japan has everything; East Timor has practically nothing. In terms of the energy 
supply that we can avail ourselves of, there is such a big gap. Japan, under extreme heat, 
was using electricity so much for air conditioning. No matter where you went in Japan, 
air conditioners were working 24 hours a day. Everyone was using it. But in East Timor, 
a very, very poor countr—the poorest country in Asia—they cannot use their electricity. 
They do not have the electricity to use for these kinds of purposes. Unless we can bridge 
and narrow the gap between the conditions in the two—very rich and poor—countries, 
we will not be able attain peace. I felt this so strongly. Of course, it is difficult for us 
Japanese people to go back to the time immediately after the war when we had nothing. 
But I think we have to learn to be much more humble in Japan and to have a more 
frugal life. All of us must put our strength together to try to hammer out what sort of 
ODA is most needed. 
Another thing I felt very strongly was that when I visited East Timor, I realized—as I 
8 said on the VTR—that development assistance is very much like raising children. What 
this means is that until the child grows up, you need to put in or invest a lot of time, 
work and money. So it takes a long time before you see the results of all the efforts. The 
parents who have spent so much money and time in their children expect the children to 
show results. Some parents become frustrated when their children are not doing nearly 
as well and the parents will get angry saying, “I have invested so much money and time 
in you and why are you not performing well?” Yes, at times we have the same 
experiences. Sometimes we become fretful that progress is not making as much 
headway as expected. But each child has his or her own individuality, so each country 
has its own individuality, its own style of development and requires its own unique 
ODA as well. I hope that Japanese ODA, together with non-governmental organizations 
(NGOs), the Japanese people, the Japanese government and the international community, 
they will all form partnerships to try to find out what kind of programs would be most 
effective in that particular locality. I hope that we can continue to do so. Thank you very 
much. 
Ms. Shimizu: Thank you very much. Let us give another round of big applause to Ms. 
Misako Konno. We have heard from UNDP Goodwill Ambassador, Ms. Misako Konno. 
She has talked about the people who are active in the forefront of ODA programs. I was 
very, very interested in her talk. Now I would like to hear from the ambassadors in 
Japan, who will give us their presentations about Japanese ODA. I would like to invite 
Their Excellencies the ambassadors from four countries and I would like to ask 
Professor Yokota to play the role of moderator. Professor Yokota, please. 
Mr. Yokota: Now we would like to start the Symposium. I am Yozo Yokota. I am the 
special adviser to the Rector of the United Nations University. Today I am going to play 
the role of moderator. First of all, I would like to hear the presentations by the four 
ambassadors representing different regions of the world. The time is limited, so I would 
like to ask them to finish their presentations within 15 minutes. 
From this side, we have the Ambassadors with us in alphabetical order. But I heard that 
the Ambassador to the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka has to leave a little 
bit earlier due to his business schedule. Therefore, I would like to change the order from 
alphabetical order. First, I would like to hear from His Excellency Amunugama. After 
the four Ambassadors have finished their presentations, I would like to take a brief 
break and then I would like to come back and continue our general discussion. At that 
9 time, I would like to have very active interventions by the audience. 
First, I would like to call on His Excellency Mr. Karunatilaka Amunugama, the 
Ambassador, to make a 15-minute presentation. Ambassador, please. 
His Excellency Mr. Karunatilaka Amunugama, Ambassador of the Democratic Socialist 
Republic of Sri Lanka: Thank you very much, Professor Yokota. Your Excellencies, 
ladies and gentlemen. First I would like to express my gratitude to the organizers of this 
Symposium, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for giving me an opportunity to 
speak about the issues and expectations surrounding Japanese ODA from the recipients’ 
point of view. We are all gathered here today, most of us, as recipient countries because 
we have benefited over the years from Japanese ODA and because we are interested in 
building an appropriate model of ODA that would suit our requirements in a changing 
world. 
I believe that it is fitting for Sri Lanka to have been given this opportunity to speak on 
this occasion for two reasons. The first reason is that, in a sense, it all began in Colombo. 
It is well known that Japan’s Official Development Assistance, or ODA, began in 1954 
when Japan joined the Colombo Plan and commenced provision of technical assistance. 
It is also well known that the Colombo Plan was established in 1950 after a meeting of 
the Commonwealth Foreign Ministers in Colombo and came into operation in 1951; the 
objective being to provide economic aid to the region, then denoted as “South and 
Southeast Asia.” It is, however, not so well known that the idea of the necessity of 
developing a mechanism to ensure economic development of a larger part of Asia first 
emerged with the Colombo Plan. This is why I say Japan’s ODA has an intimate link 
with Sri Lanka. 
A distinguished Sri Lankan statesman, J.R. Jayawardena, had the following to say about 
the Colombo Plan during his famous speech at the San Francisco Peace Conference in 
1951: “The Colombo Conference considered Japan not as an isolated case, but as part of 
the region known as South and Southeast Asia, containing a large portion of the world’s 
wealth and population, and consisting of countries which have only recently regained 
their freedom. Two ideas emerged at this conference. One, that of an independent Japan, 
and the other, the necessity for the economic and social development of the peoples of 
South and Southeast Asia to ensure which, what is now known as the Colombo Plan 
was launched. ” 
10 The second reason as to why Sri Lanka may be an appropriate selection is because my 
country today can be seen as a good case study that exemplifies the shift in Japanese 
ODA policy in the new century and the role it wishes to play. I am talking about Japan’s 
ongoing contribution to the peace process in Sri Lanka. I will speak about this later in 
more detail. 
First, I want to concentrate on the structure of my presentation, which I have divided 
into three main parts. In the first part, I discuss Japan’s ODA in the Asian context with 
special focus on Southwest Asia and talk about the changing role of Japan’s ODA today. 
In the second part, I examine the special implications of Japanese ODA on small 
developing countries like Sri Lanka and the dynamics of the donor-recipient 
relationship. In the third part, I talk about the challenges facing the future of Japanese 
ODA and developing a future ODA model. 
In keeping with the original objective of the Colombo Plan, Japan has allocated a major 
portion of its bilateral ODA—50-60%—over the years to countries in Asia. As you are 
aware, it was due to strategic geopolitical reasons that the main focus of Japanese 
foreign policy in the 1950s happened to be East and Southeast Asia. This emphasis on 
Asia as being a basic and consistent policy of Japan’s ODA was explicitly stated in the 
ODA Charter in the medium-term policy. Although Japan’s initial political engagement 
with Southwest Asia was minimal, starting from the 1960s until the 1980s, the 
economic involvement in Japan with countries in South Asia expanded rapidly, so much 
so that by the end of the Cold War, Japan had become the top bilateral donor to 
countries in South Asia and it accounted for 1/4th of total Japanese ODA. 
What I wish to focus on today is the increasingly important role that Japan came to play 
in Southwest Asia after 1990. It was as if Japan had rediscovered Southwest Asia after 
1990. This can be seen as a reflection of Japan’s re-adjustment of its foreign policy to a 
changing world order in the 1990s. To quote Prime Minister Koizumi’s own words from 
a speech delivered in 2004, he observed, “Recently, I, myself, have become keenly 
aware of the increased sense of unity of the entire Asian region.” From this point 
onward, Japan’s interactions and linkages with Southwest Asian and Southeast Asian 
sub-systems increased rapidly. 
The new and qualitatively different phase in Japan-Sri Lanka relations, which evolved 
11 after 2000, when Japan began to play an important political role in Sri Lanka’s peace 
process, has to be viewed in this context. I have already said that Japan’s foreign policy 
underwent a process of review and a qualitative change in the 1990s. As discussed 
earlier, the changing international order and the emergence of new threats to global 
security compelled Japan to rechart its role in the world. From this point onward, Japan 
came to play a visible role as conflict manager and peace builder in a number of internal 
conflict situations in Asia. Promotion of human rights and democracy, peace building 
and conflict management through its ODA program became new priority areas for Japan. 
Japan’s proactive approach to the peace process in Sri Lanka has, for example, 
contributed positively toward seeking a lasting solution to the conflict. Japanese NGOs 
too have entered the sphere of peace and reconstruction activities in these countries. 
Through Japan’s peace building role, it is projecting a new image of itself to the world 
as a promoter of regional and global peace and security. 
In this changing scenario, South Asia has come to acquire new importance. The rapid 
economic development in India and technological advancement in the subcontinent as a 
whole has no doubt spurred on this rejuvenated interest in the region. A study of Japan’s 
allocation of ODA to South Asian countries in the 1990s also shows the increased 
emphasis it has placed on positively engaging this reason. This new role played by 
Japan should have a decisive impact on political and social development in the region. 
Moving on to the second part of my presentation, if someone were to remark that the 
most important foreign policy factor which has guided Japan-Sri Lanka relations in the 
post-war period has been Japan’s ODA to our country, I would have to agree. After 1977, 
the flow of ODA from Japan to Sri Lanka surpassed the flow from other conventional 
donors from the West, and Japan thus became the largest single donor to our country. It 
is known that Japan’s ODA has led to economic growth and prosperity among many 
developing countries. However, we also know that aid is only one factor of economic 
development. It is by no means the only factor. In addition to aid, trade and investment 
play a key role in economic development. In the case of Sri Lanka too, following the 
liberalization of the economy in 1977, trade between Japan and Sri Lanka witnessed 
rapid growth, with Japan becoming Sri Lanka’s second largest trading partner. 
The pattern of trade relations between our two countries, however, has not changed 
much from 1977 to date. While Japan is our largest trading partner, the trade balance 
continues to remain heavily in favor of Japan, with the trade gap increasing over the 
12 years in Japan’s favor. The case with regard to Japanese foreign direct investment (FDI) 
flows into Sri Lanka is somewhat similar. While there has been a sharp increase in 
Japanese FDI outflows to certain other regions—for example, North America, Europe, 
South and Southeast Asian economies over the last several decades—Sri Lanka has 
been able to attract only a relatively small portion of FDI flows from Japan in terms of 
both numbers and total value. This is in spite of various economic policy reforms 
undertaken by successive governments with offers of incentives to attract FDI. 
My point in discussing the above scenarios is to show Japan’s role in helping Sri Lanka 
achieve economic development over the years can be seen more as one of providing 
financial and other resources through concessionary loans than one of providing 
markets for its products or FDI for investment. One might argue that we need the latter 
more than ever today for economic development. While it is true that the construction of 
infrastructure with Japanese loan aid has led to promotion of investment, trade and 
growth in production in many developing countries, there are many aid recipient 
countries whose foreign investment has not increased significantly over the years. While 
these massive flows of ODA have strengthened people-to-people contact and bilateral 
relations between the recipient countries and Japan, the unequal donor-recipient 
relationship has acquired clear dominance over cultural and other links. This has 
certainly been the case in Sri Lanka. I would like to emphasize that confining our 
bilateral relations to a narrow donor-recipient track will only have negative implications 
for both parties. If we were to seek a truly enriching experience, we need to move 
beyond these confining donor-recipient parameters. 
Now I come to the third and final part of my presentation, which talks about future 
challenges. One of the major challenges faced by Japan today is its decreasing ODA 
budget, which is under extreme pressure today due to the increasing restrictions placed 
on it. As you are aware, one of the reasons for holding this Symposium today is to think 
of ways and means of how to regain and restore ODA’s strategic importance in Japanese 
diplomacy. It is indeed unfortunate that in the face of a prolonged economic slump, 
severe fiscal constraints and increasing critical public opinion, Japan’s ODA budget had 
to suffer successive cuts since 1998. This is a trend in sharp contrast to other Group of 
Seven (G7) countries, which since 2000 have been gradually increasing their ODA 
budget to meet the new threats posed after 9/11. In 2003, Japan’s actual ODA spending 
posted its fourth year-on-year decline. In 2001, Japan was replaced by the United States 
as the top ODA provider in the world. This is a major challenge faced today by Japan as 
13 a donor, especially amidst global efforts made to revive each nation’s progress towards 
achieving the Millennium Development Goals in 2005. 
The ODA cuts at one level reflect Japan’s huge budget deficit, one of the largest among 
industrial nations. However, one major reason cited for the budget cut is diminishing 
public support for the allocation of ODA. The various ODA symposia organized in the 
month of October addressed the question of how to win support among the Japanese 
public for Japan’s future ODA programs. I am not sure as to whether any of them were 
able to come up with any concrete solutions. ODA is financed by taxes paid by the 
public, so gaining popular support for and understanding of ODA among the general 
public is an essential prerequisite to its implementation. Hence raising public awareness 
of the benefits of ODA to both donors as well as recipients is essential at this point. For 
example, the public should be made to understand that Japan’s national interest is 
intrinsically tied to its ODA policy. 
A common criticism leveled against ODA in Japan is its lack of transparency. Increased 
transparency in ODA disbursement is an important ODA reform that needs to be 
undertaken by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It might help in winning public support 
for ODA. Promoting public participation in ODA through NGOs and other networks 
might be another way of overcoming this hurdle. 
Japan today is well poised to play a key role in the world, fast moving toward 
multi-polarity. The country’s increasing engagement with the UN and its campaign for a 
permanent seat in the Security Council is part and parcel of its neodiplomacy. If Japan’s 
foreign policy is to create a stable international environment through ODA-based 
diplomatic strategies, it is now time for Japan to reverse the downward trend in its ODA 
budget with the support of its people and the international community. This is especially 
so when one considers that the major task of Japanese ODA in the 21st century will be to 
promote world peace. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much, Ambassador, for a very strong message and also 
very constructive and useful proposal to the future of the Japanese ODA policy. As I 
said, unfortunately Ambassador Amnugama has to leave due to prior important 
engagement after his presentation, but he told me before we came here that he 
welcomes any questions or clarifications of his presentation from the audience in 
written form, so that later he would be able to respond to those questions and comments. 
14 And I thank once again Ambassador Amnugama for your very useful speech. 
Next speaker is his Excellency, Mr. Ivan Oliveda Cannabrava, the Ambassador of the 
Federative Republic of Brazil. He has had a long and brilliant diplomatic career and 
prior to his Ambassadorship in Tokyo, he was Ambassador to Angola, as well as to 
Israel. He also spent five years in Tokyo in his earlier diplomatic career as Minister in 
the Brazilian Embassy in Tokyo. We are very much looking forward to listening to what 
Ambassador Cannabrava has to say. Ambassador, please. 
His Excellency Mr. Ivan Cannabrava, Ambassador of the Federative Republic of Brazil: 
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, it is a great honor and privilege to address this 
commemorative Symposium on the 50th anniversary of Japanese ODA, together with 
my colleagues from the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. The moment for this 
debate could not be more appropriate as next year important deliberations will take 
place regarding the reform of the UN, including the possible expansion of the 
permanent members of the Security Council and the review and appraisal of the 
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Both processes have Brazil and Japan as key 
players in mobilizing the initiatives and support of the international community in the 
effort to strengthen the institutional framework for security and development. 
In his address to the 11th session of The United Nations Conference on Trade and 
Development (UNCTAD) held last June in Sao Paulo, Ambassador Yamazaki, Chief 
Delegate of Japan, emphasized that development is one of the biggest issues confronting 
the international society today. He added that the self-help efforts by developing 
countries and the support of the international community are essential to attaining the 
MDGs. Ambassador Yamazaki reassured the world community that Japan has been 
making use of all its policy tools—including ODA, private funds, and trade—to address 
the development issue. My government views this commitment as one of the most 
praised and admired features of the Japanese public persona. We believe it represents a 
motif of pride for the Japanese people. 
In Brazil, we share the same view that it is essential to strengthen the political 
consensus and to increase the amount of technical and financial resources available for 
ODA activities for the international community to meet the MDGs. But on the other 
hand, Brazil has also reaffirmed its steadfast commitment to achieving the MDGs 
through internal efforts that are nationally controlled both by the Brazilian Government 
15 and the Brazilian civil society. 
At the initiative of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Brazil, France, Chile, and Spain 
have joined efforts to mobilize support for an international initiative against hunger and 
poverty that result in the Declaration of the World Leaders’ Meeting for the Action 
against Hunger and Poverty adopted in New York in 2004. It is a concise political text 
aimed at adding momentum to discussions on the financing for development and the 
fight against hunger and poverty. It recalls the problems faced worldwide and 
internationally agreed commitments. 
Inflows of ODA play a valuable role in providing countries with the immediate 
resources needed to unleash economic growth and social development. Foreign aid can 
be a decisive factor in improving economic infrastructure, as well as education and 
health indicators. Since the Monterrey Conference on financing for development in 
Mexico, the international community took a step forward and agreed not to leave the 
implementation of the MDGs to chance. Some donor countries have indeed reached 
ODA goal of 0.7% of their GDP. Others have set time frames to raise ODA levels. 
However promising these signs may be, much more needs to be done not to fall short of 
the additional $50 billion required at least to make good our promise of fulfilling the 
MDGs by the year 2015. 
In this context, it is a matter of growing concern for the international community that 
the difficult economic and fiscal situation in Japan in recent years associated with 
growing skepticism towards ODA has resulted in actual cut-backs in budgetary outlays 
for ODA. Brazil has been extremely grateful on her part for the ODA received from 
Japan through both the soft loans provided by the JBIC and the technical cooperation 
provided by JICA. As a middle-income country that unfortunately still shares some 
problems normally associated with the extreme poverty prevalent in some destitute 
regions of the planet, Brazil has been developing a very positive working relationship 
with Japanese agencies in charge of implementing ODA programs. 
For the last four decades, Japan has been the most important technical cooperation 
partner in Brazil. Through its programs and projects, JICA has granted thousands of 
Brazilian agents technical expertise in human development training in such crucial 
fields such as public health, environment, and agriculture. 
16 Now I would like to draw your attention to a very successful cooperation project carried 
out by Brazil and Japan, which had a tremendously positive impact on the Brazilian 
production of grains, mainly soybeans and corn. I am referring to the project for the 
development of the Cerrado; the Cerrado, which is the savannah region in Brazil. This 
project—which is called by ‘Prodecer’ project as it is known—was a very important 
tool in helping to modernize and increase the agricultural productivity of the otherwise 
unexploited vast savannah region in my country. Divided into three stages, from 
1979-2001, this project has been internationally recognized as a model for international 
cooperation that allowed to acquire the skills and competencies that has been leading it 
to become one of the world leaders in the agri-business sector. 
As you may know, Brazil is now responsible for about 20% of the world’s soybean 
production. It is also the world’s fifth largest country, with a territory about the size of 
the United States (US). Just to give you an idea of the importance of this project, the 
Prodecer has reached an area of 200 million hectares—the equivalent of five times the 
territory of Japan. Finally, as a result of this project, Brazilian soybean exports to Japan 
have jumped from 1.6% to about 12% over a 20 year period. 
This solid relationship between Japan and Brazil on the bilateral level has also led to a 
very fruitful experience on trilateral cooperation as well. Starting in the year 2001 with 
the establishment of the Japan-Brazil Partnership Program that aims at extending 
technical assistance and social development to Third Countries, top Brazilian research 
institutions began providing training to technicians to African countries, namely Angola 
and Mozambique. Under the umbrella of this Partnership Program, Brazil has also 
extended its training capabilities to the benefit of some other Latin American countries 
and more recently to East Timor. In that context, I heard the great presentation which 
was made by Ms. Konno, and I myself who visited East Timor a couple of times, I think 
that Ms. Konno is in a very generous way, in a very Japanese way, dedicated a very 
important part of her time to a very noble cause, which is the development of East 
Timor. You probably know that East Timor is also a Portuguese-speaking country, 
therefore we keep with this new country very close ties. 
As for the financial cooperation between Brazil and Japan, until the fiscal year 2003, 14 
ODA projects, amounting to US$1.7 billion have been implemented by JBIC. Some of 
JBIC supported projects, like the Tiete River Basin—this pollution project—the same 
project which was quite recently visited by Prime Minister Koizumi in his recent visit to 
17 Sao Paulo. For controlling flooding if the Tiete River which flows through Sao Paulo— 
Brazil’s largest city—we have had an impressive social and environmental impact on 
Brazil’s life. 
Another project that deserves special mention is the project Jaiba II in Minas Gerais 
State. It is today the most important project of expansion of the agricultural frontier in 
Brazil and irrigation in South America. The project will generate 100,000 new jobs for 
agricultural settlers in the region and earn about US$60 million annually in export 
revenues. We are therefore very pleased with the ODA assistance that we get from Japan. 
And besides also the Brazilian case, I think it is very important to emphasize the 
important role that Japan is playing in peace building—as it was mentioned by my 
colleague from Sri Lanka—and post-conflict construction. I think these are very 
important fields in which Japan has a very high profile and I hope will continue to have. 
Thank you very much. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much Ambassador Cannabrava for very useful information 
particularly from Latin America, in particular from Brazilian experience, of Japanese 
bilateral and also trilateral assistance. I think there are a lot of points to be discussed a 
little later when we get into the discussion session. 
Now I should like to move on to the next speaker, his Excellency Ambassador Domingo 
Siazon. As you may know, Ambassador Siazon has had a very long and friendly, 
intimate relationship with Japan. He is an excellent speaker of Japanese. One time, for 
the first time when I met him and he was speaking in Japanese, I thought he was 
Japanese. And when he introduced himself as Ambassador to Japan from the Philippines, 
I was really astonished but also welcomed that such an important person speaks 
excellent Japanese and trying to establish a good relationship further between the two 
countries. Ambassador Siazon was the Ambassador in Tokyo for five years since 
1993…I am sorry, two years, 1993-1995, and then he was Foreign Minister for the 
Republic of the Philippines and then he came back to Japan as Ambassador since 2001. 
As you can see, how closely he has been watching what Japan has been doing and we 
are eager to listen to Ambassador Siazon; what he has to say. Ambassador, please. 
His Excellency Mr. Domingo L. Siazon Jr., Ambassador of the Republic of the 
Philippines: Thank you very much. Deputy Director-General Kodama, Professor Yokota, 
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, I am so pleased to join you in this important 
18 Symposium held, as it is, to commemorate Japan’s accession to the Colombo Plan and 
celebrate a half century of Japanese ODA. This celebration cannot be more pronounced 
than in Asia, for nowhere is the success of Japanese foreign aid more evident than in 
this, our common region. 
In 2001, Japan accounted for 41% of all the ODA received by Asia from donor 
countries belonging to the Development Assistance Committee (DAC). In 2002, nearly 
61% of Japan’s total ODA went to Asia, with Southeast Asia continuing to rank high in 
Japan’s list of priorities. In the late 1980s, Japanese foreign aid accounted for at least 
15% and as high as 30% of the entire budget expenditures of almost all Asian countries 
with infrastructure development being one of the economic sectors benefiting the most. 
For instance, the total installed electric-generating capacity from generating stations 
generated with Japanese yen loans in Malaysia was 46%, for Indonesia 31%, for 
Thailand 16%, for the Philippines 5%. The lift better infrastructure gave to development 
efforts in Southeast Asia has been tremendous. Of course, success always has many 
fathers, but let it never be said that the vibrancy of Asian economies today owed little to 
Japanese foreign aid. Moreover, whenever continued growth and development were 
threatened as in times of region-wide emergencies, Japan has been quick to lend Asian 
countries a hand. Japan responded with the Miyazawa Plan during the Asian Economic 
and Financial Crisis, and with the Okinawa Initiative to the Severe Acute Respiratory 
Syndrome (SARS) and Avian Flu epidemics. 
In the past 23 years, the Philippines received a total of more than $9.4 billion from 
Japan, making it the third largest recipient of Japanese ODA, behind Indonesia and 
China. We have also thus far availed of 26 yen loan packages and of Japanese technical 
cooperation valued at $1.6 billion. The Philippines receives Japanese grant aid of more 
than $60 million a year. 
So much has been said already, not just in Japan itself, about the past accomplishments, 
current role and effectiveness, and future directions for Japanese ODA, yet sour notes 
have been sounded, ranging from service, showing that people in recipient countries 
have little or no awareness of Japanese foreign aid to outright criticism of certain 
Japanese ODA projects. Not surprisingly, reactions within Japan to those criticisms have 
been inauspicious, along with mounting concern about Japan’s fiscal situation. Calls for 
a raise to occur of ODA allocations and these the government heeded. 
19 Those adverse upshots notwithstanding, the public debate and the heightened interest of 
Japanese taxpayers in the ODA process have yielded very important reforms; the most 
important of which has been the institution of greater transparency and enhanced 
participation by stakeholders, including academia, NGOs, local communities, and 
relevant agencies. 
Moreover, to ensure that ODA projects serve the best interests of recipient countries, 
improved and more country-specific guidelines now govern the process. I had the honor 
last year to participate as the only foreign member of a panel tasked to screen candidates 
for the position of Environmental Inspector of the Japan Bank of International 
Cooperation. The JBIC Environmental Inspector is mandated to ensure that JBIC 
funded projects adhere strictly to environmental and social guidelines. 
When the 1992 ODA Charter was being revised, not a few observers expressed concern 
about the national interest orientation permeating the discussions. At the end of the 
process, it became evident that the revised charter’s outlook is not only not myopic, or 
self-centered, but much broadened and more progressive. It now firmly incorporates the 
concept of human security. There is clearer focus on poverty reduction, conflict 
resolution, prevention of terrorism, refugee assistance, and mitigation of infectious 
diseases, in addition to global issues such as the environment and water. Greater 
emphasis is placed on responding to the needs of local inhabitants and communities. 
Japan’s ODA allocations have indeed declined. Still, despite the reductions, Japan’s 
ODA budget of $9.2 billion for fiscal year 2002, was the second largest in the world and 
represented about 1/5 of the total ODA of DAC countries. In the last year, years 2000 
and 2001, Japanese ODA per capita was $97, the largest among G-7 countries and the 
seventh among all DAC countries. I therefore do not see the decline as the symptom of 
irreversible aid fatigue on the part of the Japanese public, but rather, as an adjustment 
towards focus and efficiency. 
The core idea of the revised charter is to use taxpayer money not only more efficiently, 
but also strategically in ways that will promote Japan’s goals of enhancing the security 
and prosperity of the global environment and of itself. Towards what ends Japan 
allocates its ODA is therefore as important if not more so than the ODA amount it gives. 
Japan’s neighbors in East Asia throughout the last half century have gained much from 
Japanese ODA. Now, some of these countries are themselves able to extend ODA to 
20 others. 
Is Japanese ODA still relevant in this region? As you are well aware, East Asia has 
experienced economic growth that weathered a severe economic and financial crisis and 
very adverse business cycles. Each of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations 
(ASEAN) Plus Three economies is now a major trading partner of the others. Growing 
economic interdependence has enabled East Asia to move towards more formalized 
economic arrangements beginning with free trade areas. Observers say that Japanese 
ODA will have a significantly less role to play in East Asia on the reasoning that trade 
liberalization can contribute more to developing economies than infusions of ODA. 
Indeed, there are instruments other than ODA that also have far-reaching beneficial 
effects on developing economies, such as greater market access for developing country 
products and FDI, or through greater integration among neighboring economies. 
The key to integration is convergence of economies. The expansion of the Canada-US 
Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in 1994 to include Mexico has shown that it is possible for 
a developing country to join developed economies in a reciprocal economic 
arrangement. And last May, the European Union (EU) welcomed ten countries with 
much lower levels of development. ASEAN and Japan are on track to bring about yet 
another example, the ASEAN-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership. 
Convergence however requires two important components and in both, I wish to point 
out, ODA has a large role to play. The first component is quality human resources, 
without which effective regional integration cannot proceed. This reflects the self-help 
philosophy in Japanese ODA, or as JICA’s activities exemplify, it is about teaching 
people how to fish instead of giving them fish. It is therefore of great importance that 
capacity building, movement of natural persons, and other human resources topics have 
been included in ASEAN and Japan’s bilateral FTA negotiations. 
To illustrate, one promising area of cooperation deals with Japan’s rapidly ageing 
society. For now, one out of five Japanese is an elderly person. This ratio will become 
one out of four by as early as 2015 with deleterious effects on Japan’s social security 
systems and its economic competitiveness. Already, Japanese caregiver associations 
admit that Japan’s demographic situation has led to shortages of health care personnel in 
rural communities and in certain industries. We have thus received request on the 
possibility of training and then recruiting Filipino nurses or caregivers. 
21 We welcome this kind of cooperation. But in order to realize this, Filipino medical care 
professionals will first have to undergo training in Japanese language and caregiving 
practices. The mechanism for making this possible is actually one of the topics for the 
ongoing Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement. In this regard, Japanese 
ODA has a role to play in the implementation of the training programs for nurses and 
caregivers. 
At the same time since human resource development (HRD) is the personal phase of 
regional integration, Japanese ODA should continue facilitating exchanges with 
ASEAN of technical trainees, students and academics. In 2003, 93% of the 109,000 
registered students in Japan were from Asia, but only 5% came from Malaysia, Thailand, 
Indonesia and the Philippines. Conversely, Japanese ODA could be used also to 
encourage Japanese students to study in ASEAN. For in either direction, since students 
stay longer, they are more likely to learn Japanese or other languages and cultivate 
lasting friendships with their peers. Moreover, Japanese ODA should maintain its focus 
on facilitating South-South HRD cooperation among developing economies, as that is a 
clear extension of the self-help philosophy. 
Aside from quality human resources, a second important component is quality 
infrastructure, which is crucial to private sector entrepreneurship. The Japanese 
Chamber of Commerce in my country has always listed lack of infrastructure as a 
leading reason discouraging foreign investors. For countries like Vietnam, Cambodia, 
and Laos, that problem is even more serious. East Asia has begun laying the foundations 
of an Asian bond market, but until this system is fully developed, it is to the interest of 
less developed countries that Japanese ODA continues to assist in public works essential 
in national progress, such as transportation, communications and power facilities. For 
infrastructure development financing, I expect ASEAN countries to continue tapping 
into Japan’s yen loans, because these are comparable to, if not better than the loans from 
the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. 
Critics of Japanese ODA regard yen loans as little more than an opportunity for 
Japanese private companies to expand their business abroad. However, the Japanese 
public must be informed that the loans are provided only to countries recognized as 
having sufficient capacity to repay the loan. For those unable to repay loans, such as 
some countries in Africa, Japanese ODA has been flexible enough to provide more grant 
22 aid. To counter those criticisms, the focus should be on transparency in recipient 
countries with good governance, open procedures and extensive consultations can 
greatly diminish projects which are supplier-driven. And tying the projects to Japanese 
firms will also help raise the stature of Japanese ODA loans. 
In efforts to reduce regional development disparities, Japanese ODA also can play a 
large role. To facilitate convergence in Southeast Asia, Japanese ODA has not been 
limited to the bilateral context. It is now contributing to the development of the Mekong 
region, where ODA projects are being implemented in five countries and one region in 
China. 
To summarize, quality human resources and quality infrastructure may be regarded as 
the software and hardware of convergence, without which effective regional economic 
integration cannot proceed to meet fast-paced global challenges. 
Before I conclude, let me mention another area where Japanese ODA can contribute to 
regional integration—the area of security taken in its broad meaning. The passing of the 
old geo-political order and renewed ethnic animosities have resulted in outbreaks of 
conflict with heavy losses in human life and refugee outflows in their wake. What is 
heartening, is that the revised ODA charter has sharpened Japan’s focus on such 
humanitarian issues, particularly on cooperation in peacebuilding. As former UN 
Undersecretary General Akashi has said, ‘If ODA is skillfully utilized, even on a small 
scale, but quickly and dynamically, it will have an extreme positive impact on the 
course of peace and growth.’ This implies the use of ODA, not only for peacetime, 
long-term development, but also for projects that would consolidate peace, such as 
assistance to refugees and internally displaced people, removal of anti-personnel 
landmines, disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration, election support and 
restoration of basic services. 
Japan is now expanding its profile in peacekeeping operations overseas. But I believe it 
is in such humanitarian areas where it can earn greater international goodwill and 
lasting political influence. Let me therefore express my thanks to Japan for its generous 
ODA assistance in Southern Philippines. I am sure that the peoples of Afghanistan, the 
Indonesian province of Aceh, Sri Lanka, and long before all these, Cambodia, share this 
gratitude. Japanese ODA has been a lifeline for many peoples for half a century. With 
greater focus and effectiveness, it can touch and improve even more people’s lives in 
23 the years ahead. Thank you very much for your attention. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much Ambassador Siazon for a very useful information 
and particularly, I am impressed by your focusing on the importance of Japanese ODA 
perhaps to achieve even greater objectives for example regional integration in ASEAN 
region and East Asian countries. And also I am very much interested in learning from 
you that Japanese ODA is not only assisting developing countries and developing 
peoples, but also it is a mutually-assisting relationship. And Japan is actually helped 
through its own ODA. For example, he gave the example of coping with Japan’s ageing 
society coming up soon. So those are the things perhaps we can discuss a little later. 
Now last but not at all least, a presentation by his Excellency Ambassador Elikunda 
Elineema Mtango. He also has had a very impressive diplomatic career and before 
taking up his post in Tokyo of the United Republic of Tanzania, he was Ambassador to 
Angola, also he was Ambassador to the Tanzanian Mission to the United Nations (UN) 
and other international organizations in Geneva. Also he was Deputy Minister for 
Foreign Affairs, and since 2000 he has been the Ambassador to Japan. Ambassador 
Mtango, you have the floor sir. 
His Excellency Mr Elly Elikunda Elineema Mtango, Ambassador of the United 
Republic of Tanzania: Thank you. Mr. Kodama, Deputy Director-General of the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Yokota, your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. I will 
begin my presentation by first of all explaining the very successful experience of my 
country with Japanese ODA; and secondly, I will go through briefly the impact of 
Japanese ODA in Africa as a whole; and thirdly, the challenges which are still to be 
faced concerning African development; and lastly, the expectations surrounding 
Japanese ODA in Africa. 
Tanzania has been fortunate to be selected as one of the priority countries for Japanese 
ODA in Africa. We are actually top on the list of grant aid recipients in Africa. It is also 
one of the few countries where Japan has been contributing to sector-based basket funds 
of the agricultural sector development program. And where all the money in non-project 
grant aid was used for direct budget support, starting from the year 2001. Japanese ODA 
was channeled into Tanzania as a prioritized area of agriculture, basic education, basic 
health and medical services, basic infrastructure and forest conservation. 
24 In the agriculture sector, Japan promoted aid coordination among various donors 
through a combination of grant assistance and technical cooperation. Japan has also 
advocated the enhancement of local government capacity in the area of agriculture. In 
the field of education, Japan provided grants for classroom construction and for 
technical cooperation. Also, for a teacher’s training program as well as remote learning 
and adult education. This support coupled with other donors’ support and our own 
efforts have resulted in a rapid increase in primary school enrollment. To the extent of 
that, Tanzania expects to achieve the MDG of universal primary education by the year 
2006 instead of the target year of 2015. 
Japanese support will be critical in the construction of basic infrastructure, including 
roads, bridges, communication, and other power distribution networks, water lines, 
sewers and waste treatment facilities, given the rapid growth of urban population. So far, 
Japan has constructed about 20% of total land capable roads in the capital city of Dar E 
Salaam, 40% of the total power distribution, 30% of the telephone circuits, thereby 
strengthening our country’s market-oriented policies and our democratization process. 
The total of Japanese support in the year 2001, for example, exceeded 200 million yen. I 
would like therefore to convey Tanzania’s deepest gratitude to the government and 
people of Japan for this gesture of true friendship. 
ODA has been very effective throughout Africa and contributes to the positive 
developments that have occurred in Africa during the last ten years. The Tony Blair 
Commission on African Development which was formed early this year, established that 
income poverty is falling in 15 African countries, nine out of ten children in Africa are 
now in school, real GDP growth rate is about 5% in 19 African countries, and 
democratically elected leaders do now exist in 32 African countries, compared to only in 
three countries in 1973. Furthermore, inasmuch as the situation in Darfur and Cote 
d’Ivoire is disappointing, conflicts in Africa have decreased from 19 in the year 2000 to 
three or four today. 
Africa is very grateful for the level of interest showed by Japan towards African 
development, and Japan is recognized as one of the leading providers of ODA to Africa. 
We must also acknowledge the Tokyo International Conference on African 
Development (TICAD) Process and the strong leadership role Japan has played over the 
past 11 years. Without TICAD, and given the many other dramatic events that have 
occurred across the globe, it is clear that Africa and African issues would have fallen 
25 even further down the overall international priority list. 
However, there remain great challenges, posed by the current situation in Africa as Dr. 
Konare, the African Union Commission Chairperson, recently stated, “At the current 
rate of progress, many African countries do not stand any chance of achieving the 
MDGs.” The situation is particularly gloomy in 23 African countries. His view was that 
unless some major effort was made to help Africa, it is likely that many African 
countries would see deterioration in their conditions and levels of development. He 
further pointed out that Africa’s population would exceed the 1 billion level within 20 
years, the vast majority of them poor. That prospect, together with the implication of 
possible movement of poverty stricken Africans towards the developed world, should 
send a very strong signal, that considerably more needs to be done, and quickly, to assist 
Africa become part of the mainstream process of globalization. 
The Organisation of African Unity (OAU) Commission chairperson spoke of the need 
for a massive effort on the part of the developed world, similar to the effort made by the 
US to rebuild Europe and Japan after the devastation of World War II, similar to the 
massive development effort made by Japan itself with regard to its Asian neighbors. The 
main focus should be development and the extension of agricultural production, 
agro-processing industries, development of small and medium-scale sector, access to 
markets, access to financing, new technology and the creation of jobs for the youth. 
Africa needs to increase its own capacity to beneficiate the raw materials it produces in 
such abundance. It needs to value-add within its own countries and derive the benefit of 
higher value exports. Developing this capacity might well go beyond the current scope 
of JICA activities and programs, but it is what Africa needs, it is what Japan already has 
by way of technology expertise. Japan’s private sector has the finance, so is it not 
possible for JICA to try to fashion some of its programs along these lines? Is it not 
possible for JICA to work more closely with Japanese business community to develop, 
maybe together with JIBC and other development institutions already operating in 
Africa and even some of our own development institutions, to develop programs which 
could lead in this direction? Namely, the path towards a greater Japanese private sector 
presence and engagement in Africa. 
There is a great expectation in Africa regarding Japan which is viewed positively for its 
remarkable economic and technological achievement, for being the country that 
26 championed African development through the TICAD process and the country which 
was first to recognize and declare that there will be no stability and prosperity in the 21st 
century unless the problems of Africa are resolved. 
Let me conclude by referring to a recent commentary in the US Journal of Foreign 
Affairs, where the editor James Hodge Jr. argued that the world is undergoing “a 
transfer of power from West to East” that will dramatically change the context for 
dealing with international challenges. I would submit that Japan is the main pillar of the 
emerging power centre of the East. Africa looks upon Japan to play the leadership role 
that rightfully belongs to Japan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much Ambassador Mtango, for bringing to attention the 
importance of African countries for the whole world in achieving the Millenium 
Development Goals, and I am emphasizing on the role of, particularly, Japan’s ODA in 
working with African countries and African peoples to achieve these important goals. I 
think we have further discussion along this line later, but I thank him for the very good 
presentation that he just made. Now I think we deserve a little break, and I give the 
microphone to Ms. Shimizu, Master of Ceremony. 
Ms. Shimizu: Thank you very much. Well let us take about a ten minutes’ break. So at 
15:50, we would like to resume the meeting. Until then we will have a break. So by 
15:50, please return to your seats. 
[Break] 
Ms. Shimizu: Well, would you kindly be seated. We would like to start the second part 
of this program. The first we would like to hear comments from three commentators 
about the presentations given by four Ambassadors. I would like to ask Professor 
Yokota to play the role of coordinator. 
Mr. Yokota: Well, thank you very much for your coming back. In the beginning we 
would like to hear comments from three commentators: we have Mr. Shigeru Sugunami, 
the person of Association of Medical Doctors of Asia (AMDA), and Mr. Katsuhiro 
Harada and Mr. Michio Kanda from JICA. And we would like to hear about seven 
minute comments from them, starting with Mr. Kanda from JICA. 
27 Mr. Kanda served as the head of the Manila office, and he also served as the head of the 
Social Development Cooperation Department. Now he is a counselor to the President of 
JICA. Mr. Kanda, please. 
Mr. Michio Kanda, Counselor to the President of JICA: Thank you, I am Kanda. I am 
from JICA, and today we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Japanese ODA. 
Looking back over the past years, well, I have spent about 35 years being engaged in 
development programs, so out of 50, 35 years have been closely related to my life. So 
from the practical perspective, I would like to look back over the past 50 years. 
Especially I would like to talk about the grant program and the technical cooperation. 
First I would like to describe the characteristics of Japanese ODA. Professor Yokota and 
their Excellencies mentioned Japanese ODA, consisting of loans, grants, and technical 
cooperation. These three are major pillars of Japanese ODA and we combined these 
three, so that they can fit in the situation of recipient countries. So this is one of the 
characteristics of Japanese ODA. It is often said that Japan is well known for its 
effectiveness in infrastructure building, and also the ratio of the loan is greater than the 
grant in comparison with the ODA provided by other countries. 
And second, all, as an example of these three forms of Japanese ODA—as Ambassador 
Siazon mentioned—there are several examples that we have observed, and that the 
Ambassador Cannabrava talked about the development. JICA’s technical cooperation 
was combined with Japanese grants, bringing great benefits to the recipient country. 
And second, in my experience I have to say that Japanese ODAs made a great 
contribution because Japan could utilize its experience of becoming a prosperous 
country after the devastation following the war, and I think that Japan seems to be the 
only one country outside Europe which achieved such a rapid reconstruction. So Japan 
opened its country after a long period of closing the country, and it opened its country to 
the world in the beginning of the Meiji Era, and this is one of the very important 
experiences. And this was combined with this bitter experience of war and post war 
reconstruction and I think that these experiences could be well utilized in the form of 
ODA. 
Well, Japan started its ODA when Japan was still poor. So I think that in 1980s, 
Japanese ODA had been provided by utilizing Japanese past experience of 
reconstructing its country. So we focused on the human development and the public 
28 health, and the road construction and electricity distribution. So we focused on the 
development in the private sector. I think it is one of the Japanese characteristics of 
ODA. 
The third characteristic was already mentioned by Ambassador Siazon. That is to help 
the self-help by recipient countries. Well, Japan has continued placing a focus on 
self-help or ownership of recipient countries, and I think that partnership and ownership 
are two major pillars of Japanese ODA and this is now shared by all the countries in the 
world. So Japan emphasized the importance of self-help by recipient countries and this 
kind of philosophy made a great contribution to the development and progress of 
developing countries. 
Then I would like to talk about the future direction of Japanese ODA. The first, well 
there are bilateral programs, but in addition to bilateral programs recently we have 
observed that the regional cooperation plays a very important role in the East Asia and 
in all ASEAN nations starting with the five nations, and have expanded to ten countries. 
So Japan has helped those countries expanding regional cooperation, and I think that 
these can be regarded as good models of successful ODA. Japan started the TICAD 
process in 1993. It started the TICAD process for African countries. By continuing the 
TICAD process, I hope that Africa will share the common goal of development, and that 
New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) programs are being implemented. 
Through the strong support of regional cooperation, we can promote our ODA programs 
in the future. This must be one of the major pillars in the future direction. 
The second is the cooperation of self-cooperation. This has already been mentioned by 
today’s presenters. Based on Japanese experience, we can extend the good quality 
cooperation to developing countries. But at the same time the developing countries, 
which experienced development, can share their experience with other countries with 
South Korea, with Thailand—experience the development process. Therefore, they can 
utilize their experience to help other developing countries. That is the idea of 
South-South cooperation and Japan can effectively promote such South-South 
cooperation. Actually in some Asian countries, there are some people who are interested 
in cooperation to African nations and in Latin American countries—in Mexico, 
Argentina and Brazil—people are interested in extending help to other developing 
countries in the region. And JICA has also plans to help South-South cooperation. This 
is another pillar of the future direction of Japanese ODA. 
29 And the third one is the support of peace building. This is becoming a very important 
issue these days. Well, this is a bit different from the conventional development aid. We 
may need different tools and technologies to promote peace building, but we can make 
the best use of past experience and also the Japanese past experience of reconstructing 
Japan after the war. And peace building in development aid share one thing in common: 
that is human security. In the words from the prospective human security, we have to 
look at very closely whether the assistance reaches the people in need. From this 
perspective, new types of activities will be needed in the future. So listening to the 
presentations by the four Ambassadors, I have got this kind of idea. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much, Mr. Kanda. You have explained to us various things 
through the JICA experiences and some of them, the Ambassadors have mentioned and 
some of them you have organized the ideas much more clearly. 
Next, Dr. Shigeru Suganami, please. He is the president of AMDA and, of course, he 
has a career as a medical doctor. But, in 1984, he established AMDA, and in 1999, he 
served as the member of the primary health care project in Zambia, and he has been 
engaged in various kinds of activities in Japan and overseas. And as president of AMDA, 
he will give us his comments on Japanese ODA. 
Dr. Shigeru Suganami, President of Association of Medical Doctors of Asia (AMDA): 
First of all I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the organizers for giving this 
opportunity to make a comment. And also I would like to say thank you to all the 
Ambassadors for giving such informative presentations. 
So the Japanese ODA has 50 year experience; however, NGO joined ODA in 1991, so 
we have the shorter period and, well, when the Gulf War broke out, the Japanese 
government spent more than 1 trillion yen. However, the Japanese aid was not very 
much appreciated, and then at that time the people criticized Japanese aid saying that 
Japanese aid does not have the human involvement. And then the Japanese government 
changed this idea and providing a budget of 1 trillion and 70 billion yen. So I think that 
the Japanese NGOs’ participation in ODA started after the Gulf War, and so people in 
the world say that the assistance with human face is needed. 
What does this mean? What does it mean to send people? And we have to learn from the 
30 history. There is a saying that the wise person learns from history. And in 1951, the Sri 
Lankan statement at the San Francisco Peace Conference in 1951 says that Japan is a 
Buddhist country and so Sri Lanka, therefore, will not ask Japan to provide wartime 
reparation. 
As Ambassador Siazon said, the quality is more important. And quite recently in 1991, 
in January when the great Hanshin earthquake took place, the then Philippine President 
Ramos said that the Philippines will provide some money for helping the affected 
people. So with his very kind words, I think that the distance between the Philippines 
and Japan became much shorter. So the very important thing is why we are going to 
help you. 
The European and American countries say that human rights protection is a focus, and 
we have branches of assistance in 28 countries and we have overseas branches all over 
the world. And we have an office in countries with different religions, and mutual 
assistance should be the core of our help. And when we become friends, then we can 
help each other and then after that we can build a partnership. But partnership can be 
built only after we share the same hardships. So the partnership can be formed only after 
we find that the other people are respectable people. So respect and trust are two very 
important elements for us to overcome the difference of religion and ethnicity. So we 
now have 28 countries working together under AMDA, so the quality of the message is 
needed. 
Quite recently, in Niigata, the great earthquake happened and the people who were 
affected by the Hanshin earthquake are now helping affected people in Niigata. Nine 
years ago they experienced a great earthquake in Kobe, and so that is a source of their 
energy to help others who are in a similar situation in Niigata. So family and 
friendship—those are very easy concepts for everybody to understand. So the most 
important thing is that you and I are friends, so when you are need then I would like to 
help you. 
Many years ago, a president of some European country said that the Japanese people do 
not have many friends. But I think that his words are not correct. And so I think that 
Japan has enjoyed a very stable history, but we might be in need some day and then will 
need help from other countries. So mutual help is the base of our principle; one is that 
we want to help whenever they are in need; and second is that there is no difference of 
31 religion or ethnicity; and third is that always we have to pay respect to the people when 
we receive help or we provide help. 
So the amount of money is not a big problem; the message is more important and the 
message is a core of the friendship. So I think that the Japanese ODA—the biggest 
problem that Japanese ODA has is the quality of the message. After 1990, the Japanese 
NGOs have joined ODA programs, in addition to Japanese official development aid. 
Now the NGOs are joining them to send the very good message to the people all over 
the world. Thank you very much. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you. Well, in implementing Japanese ODA, NGOs are playing a very 
important role. We cannot ignore the roles to be played by NGOs in this area stage. 
AMDA has been cooperating with the Japanese government in providing assistance in 
the areas where the Japanese government could not do, so thank you very much Mr. 
Suganami. 
Next, I would like to ask a representative from the media, from journalism to give us his 
views. Perhaps there was a view expressed previously that perhaps Japanese ODA is not 
well-known enough by the Japanese people. Now what can the media do about it? Well, 
we have Mr. Katsuhiro Harada with us, who is from the Nihon Keizai Shimbun. He is a 
senior staff writer. He served as a special correspondent in Sao Paolo and New York as 
well. He has been in the international field and he has won a prize for his work. So Mr. 
Harada, please. 
Mr. Katsuhiro Harada, Senior Staff Writer, Nihon Keizai Shimbun: Thank you very 
much. I am Mr. Harada from the Nihon Keizai Shimbun. I have been listening 
attentively to the Ambassadors’ presentations; I was very impressed. 
When we talk about ODA we tend to hear, within Japan, to think about from a narrow 
perspective. But if you look at the whole thing from a wider perspective of Asia, Africa 
and the global perspectives that can be very, very constructive for us Japanese as well. 
Let me give my comments based very much on what the Ambassadors have already 
mentioned. Now the first point that I wanted to make is that I expected that there has 
been some apprehension expressed in the fact that there has been a significant reduction 
in Japanese ODA. And all in all, yes, the Ambassadors have expressed this concern. 
32 Japan was the number one ODA donor up until the year 2000. However, after that there 
has been a progressive reduction in ODA, so that in the year 2003—that is last 
year—there has been a reduction by about 30%. You probably think that Japan is the 
second largest donor country today; however, when you look at the way that ODA has 
been declining here in Japan and the way how the third and fourth position 
donors—they are increasing their ODA—I would venture to say that for the year 
2004— even though we do not have the actual figures yet—I can tell you that by the 
end of this year there is a high probability that Japan will be surpassed by France. 
France would be giving more donations, more ODA, than Japan. And by the year 
2005—that is next year—England and Germany will be surpassing Japan, and Japan 
will be ranked fifth position. 
So Japan is reducing ODA, but other countries—in compliance with the Millennium 
Development Goals of the United Nations—many countries are increasing their ODA 
because one of the key objectives of the Millennium Development Goals is to reduce 
absolute poverty. And so many countries are saying that by the year 2003, they will be 
increasing their ODA to, say like, 0.3% of gross national income (GNI) or 0.7% of 
GNP. 
And the United States, also, is now giving more ODA to other countries in order to try 
to eliminate the poverty, which is believed to be the breeding ground for terrorism. Now, 
the United States—until this whole terrorism issue—was not very keen about ODA, but 
they are now increasing it. But Japan is decreasing it. 
In the revised ODA, yes indeed, it says that Japan will work hard in order to try to 
alleviate poverty in these developing countries; and at the same time, Japan is now 
volunteering itself to become the permanent member of the Security Council. And so 
when you look at all this, perhaps there seems to be some contradictions what Japan is 
aiming to achieve and what it is actually doing. I would say that Japan would have to, 
once again, think about the fact hard, that it is trying to become a member of the global 
community and what that implies. 
Now, the second point I would like to mention then is it really possible for Japan to 
increase ODA quickly? Now I do not think that is going to be possible. We have to think 
about the Japanese fiscal restraints and also the image that ODA has on the part of the 
33 Japanese people. For example, very often, ODA is associated in the mind of the 
Japanese people with interventions of the politicians, or that the Japanese companies are 
really using ODA in order to promote their business. And then there is also the fact of 
the corruption in recipient developing countries. It has these dirty images. At the same 
time, these days, people are quite critical about giving ODA to China, because China, 
they say, is no longer a developing country. 
And so what you need in the future now, it is much important to try to improve the 
quality of ODA. And what does that mean? Well, we have to enhance the accountability 
and transparency of ODA to be able to show to the people—the Japanese 
people—where the money is going, how it is being spent. And we must be also able to 
convince the Japanese people about the significance of ODA. And we must also have 
many opportunities like what we have today, getting information from Ambassadors and 
of the recipient countries to give us their views about Japanese ODA. 
Now the third point I would like to mention has to do with the large-size projects. These 
large-sized projects are feared to cause environmental destruction and also enforcing 
people to be displaced from where they are living. Now ODA could bring about 
problems; that is not impossible, but the important thing is what you have done to try to 
avoid this kind of destructive or negative impact. 
If JICA or JBIC, for example, comes up with the social or environmental guidelines to 
make sure that this is not going to destroy the social infrastructure of the recipient 
countries. I think that it is the important point. And already I appreciate the fact that 
JICA and JBIC have come up with these kinds of guidelines. However, we must 
implement those guidelines; making the guidelines is a good, positive step. However, 
what is much more important is implementing those guidelines. 
The fourth thing: strengthening partnership with NGOs. Mr. Suganami is sitting right 
next to me; he is from an NGO. We must strengthen this NGO partnership. In 
Afghanistan or Iraq, Iran and so forth, there are so many NGOs in these places and it 
has been unprecedented that so many Japanese NGOs are in these areas in order to 
undertake their activities. You know that there is a Japan platform; this is an 
organization or mechanism whereby the Foreign Ministry and the NGOs and the 
business community have joined forces. Even when NGO wanted to go for initial action, 
they did not have the money to do so immediately. Say, if some emergency occurs and 
34 they want to go to help these refugees immediately; when you do not have the money to 
support your initial activities you cannot go. But with a Japan platform now it is 
possible to do so. 
But the Japanese ODA—what percentage of ODA goes to the destination countries 
through NGOs? In the case of the United States, 33.6% of ODA goes through NGOs 
apparently, in the case of the United States. But in the case of Japan, it is said to be 
0.5%. The United States has large NGOs, like Cooperative for Assistance and Relief 
Everywhere (CARE) and so forth; however, it is from the latter 1970s-1980s that the 
United States started to have major NGOs. Before that, America did not have very many 
large-scale NGOs. It was part of the American policy to try to foster NGOs, so that 
CARE and other large-scale organizations—the NGOs—began to grow. Japan lacked in 
that effort. We are 20 years behind the United States in this respect. So we only have 
0.5% of ODA money going through NGOs. We would like to improve the figure to at 
least to the level of The Netherlands and Canada, where 10% of the ODA is going 
through NGOs. 
So there are some proposals I would now like to make. The ODA is for the purpose of 
improving the economic development and welfare of the developing countries. When 
you think about economic development, you really will also have to think about the 
environment. We are now living in an age where you can talk about economic growth 
only in terms of environmental protection as well. 
In February next year, the Kyoto Protocol is going to come into force. Now when you 
think about environment, we have the so-called flexible mechanisms like The Clean 
Development Mechanism (CDM), the trading permit and so forth. From the aspect of 
the developing countries, if so much of the money goes into this kind of environmental 
project it is not entirely 100% welcome for them; they are afraid that the money may be 
going into these environmental things at the sacrifice of other ODA projects. 
And so it is important for Japan to transfer technology to developing countries, the 
environmental technologies; also, to buy the trading permit—these are important things. 
But if they are to be done at the sacrifice of ODA projects, I do not think that is a very 
welcome thing for the developing countries. In these cases, maybe we should have some 
special quarter established for trading permit and for the transfer of environmental 
technologies. One of the things is when it comes to the issue of the success of Asian 
35 economy, I think the fact that private sector money came in—in other words, private 
investment was a very instrumental factor. We talk about the FTA—now we must keep 
in mind the movement of people, goods and money through FTA when we think about 
ODA strategies. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Well, thank you very much. Now, we would like to entertain questions or 
comments from the floor. So I would like to ask the Ambassadors to respond to the 
comments and questions from the floor, as well. So first, I would like to hear comments 
or questions from the floor. Would you please raise your hand and introduce yourself; 
your name and your affiliation? 
So switch on the microphone so that red lamp is on. Probably we will have many 
questions, so please try to be very brief. Yes please. Yes? The lady on this side. Yes? 
Ms. Ayako Hatano, Student, University of Tokyo: I am Ayako Hatano, a student at the 
University of Tokyo. Well, thank you very much for your very informative presentations. 
And listening to the Ambassador from the Asian country, I understand that the poverty 
reduction is grossly related to the Japanese ODA, but I think that it will be better that 
we provide more ODA to African countries in order to eliminate poverty. Well, so the 
budget is limited, but can we help Asian countries or promote Asian integration at the 
same time? 
Mr. Yokota: Some comment from Ambassador Mtango. Would you like to respond now 
or a little later? Whichever is fine, maybe later? Probably Ambassador Siazon would 
like to respond, and Ambassador Mtango also would like to respond. Later I would like 
to hear from there. 
Now more questions, please? 
Ms. Miura, Member, Japan Civil Liberties Union: Well, I would like to hear from 
Professor Yokota and the Ambassadors and I am a member of NGO on human rights 
protection. And probably the International Information Summit will be held in Tunisia 
next year; and ubiquitous and broadbrand are the two technologies that the Japanese 
government would like to promote. Japan tried to promote information technology (IT) 
revolution in Africa or Southeast Asian countries. So do you think that IT revolution 
will be effective in Southeast Asian countries or in Africa? 
36 Mr. Yokota: Well, I think that this is related to all the Ambassadors, as well as the 
commentators. Whoever has some interest or views on this—IT technological 
development and development assistance—it would be appreciated. 
Any other comments? The man here. 
Mr. Baluah Sanjeev, Bangladesh: ...moderator, ProfessorYokota, I am Baluah Sanjeev 
from Bangladesh and I have graduated from Tokyo University. I am an architect. 
Presently I am registered for one year at Tokyo University. And I have two points 
actually; the first one is a comment and the second one is a question. 
My comment is actually as Bangladesh is a very good partner as a developing country 
and it has many views, comments and assessments on the Japanese ODA as a recipient 
country. So maybe in this location if there is any representative from my country and it 
would be a good chance to express our views in line with this ODA, I mean activities. 
This is one—my comment then. In the future, I would like to request actually to 
consider our representatives to join these types of occasions. 
And my question, second one, is just to His Excellency, the Ambassador from the 
Philippines, Mr. Siazon and in his speech, the Ambassador has pointed out one 
important key point about the ODA—it is like a lifeline for the developing countries. 
And one of the very focus failed is the quality infrastructure development. My question 
is—actually in my country also I worked for development—I mean in the Ministry of 
Construction, in local government divisions, and we have many infrastructure 
development projects, primary school projects, other things, and quality infrastructure. 
What does it mean for developing countries? Is it acted out okay by the ODA? I mean 
the ODA professionals, that is, is it okay for developing countries? What is quality 
infrastructure for developing countries? Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. This is directly related to Ambassador Siazon but 
other ambassadors may also have some comments on this particular topic. Now I see 
someone, a gentleman way back, yes. 
Mr. Michael, Staff, United Nations: Yes, I am Michael from the Philippines and I work 
for the UN. My question is really more addressed to Mr. Kodama, but, of course, the 
37 other Ambassadors and panelists can make a comment on that, because as the title of 
this Symposium says it is about the recipient point of view. And according to my own 
personal research about Japanese ODA, when we talk about recipients’ point of view, it 
always, it is a self-referential question; it is a question that goes back to the donor. As 
the country that gives the aid and that has the resources to give. 
So my question is we already know the various challenges and problems facing the 
Japanese ODA from now and to the millennium. My question is really on the 
institutional side, because I believe that the value of aid that the donor gives is only as 
good as the institutions that implement them and that give them. And unless I think that 
the donor really goes out of its way and builds its capacity to give the right aid at the 
right time at the right place, the recipient will just have to be a beggar who cannot make 
any decisions on what aid is the best for itself. So I would like to ask Mr. Kodama, 
specifically of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to what extent is the Japanese 
government now trying to build its capacity to deliver aid that is recipient-oriented for 
the 21st century. Yes. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. Mr. Kodama agreed to respond to your question later. 
Any others? Yes, now I recognize Professor Kusano, my old friend, who is an expert on 
ODA policy. Professor Kusano. 
Mr. Kusano, Professor, Keio University, Japan: I am Kusano from Keio University. Well, 
today I have heard presentations by ambassadors on their views of Japanese ODA. I was 
very impressed with their presentations. But listening to their opinions, I feel that it 
seems that their comments are official comments representing the governments, but I 
am more interested in the frank opinions of the people in recipient countries. 
How does the general public feel about Japanese ODA in these countries? The local 
mass media—not English papers—but the local language papers are taking up Japanese 
ODA? Local TV and radios—how do they report Japanese ODA locally? If you know it, 
please let me know. 
As Mr. Ambassadors have mentioned that Japanese taxpayers, because of the very 
serious economic recession are not very active or positive about providing ODA to other 
countries, so—as Mr. Harada mentioned a short while ago—maybe Japanese ODA will 
decline if we do not do anything. So we have to appeal to Japanese taxpayers that are 
38 saying that ODA is very effective. Of course we have to listen to the opinions of 
government officials, but we want to know more about what grassroots people feel 
about Japanese ODA. How often do local media report on Japanese ODA? If you know 
about that, please let us know. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. Very useful opinions and questions. So, if we 
continue this on and on, maybe we will forget about them, and so I would like to hear 
comments from Ambassadors and commentators to respond to some of the questions 
and comments. Maybe for a few minutes each and if we have further time, then we will 
go the second round. So may I start with whoever wishes? Yes, Ambassador Siazon 
first. 
Mr. Siazon: I was getting worried because I was told by my doctor that the sign of 
ageing is when you start forgetting things. And he said there are three conditions to 
determine when you are ageing: one is when you start forgetting things, and I have 
forgotten the second and the third. That is why I was worried you might not ask us to 
comment at all. 
On the first, Mr. Mtango, of course, more ODA should be given to Africa. There is no 
question about that. But I would like to point out to you, when you provide ODA, this is 
based on a World Bank report. Whenever you have 1% of GDP in ODA coming in, it 
translates to 0.5% of GDP increase and 1% of poverty reduction. This is a World Bank 
report in 1998. I can give you a copy of my speech because all the footnotes are there 
anyway. 
Second one is NGO member. This is ubiquitous and broadband. Before you can benefit 
from the Internet, you must know how to read and write. That is the basic requirement 
and I am glad to hear that the Ambassador from Tanzania said that nine out of ten 
students in Africa; children are in school and they will meet their Millennium Challenge 
by 2006. That means that if children can read and write, then certainly the IT revolution 
will benefit them—if they have the hardware, because you might have the software, the 
brains, but no hardware. So that is when, again, Japanese ODA can help in giving the 
hardware, even second hand computers. You know we received a few hundred 
second-hand computers last year from Japan, precisely for these school children. 
The third is Mr. Baluah from Bangladesh. Certainly, ODA is required. You see, even in 
39 the European Union from six, they started growing to so many—now from 15 to 25. A 
large part of the EU program is really to make sure that those countries with lower 
levels of economic development catch up with their neighbors so that they maintain 
more or less the same level of economic development leading to a greater convergence 
in development level. And that convergence later on brings not only prosperity but 
peace in the region. Poor neighbors can lead to political and security risks. And that is 
part of the problem in the Middle East—some are poor, others are very rich. That is also 
a problem in Africa. That is why there are a lot of civil wars, or near civil wars going on, 
or within countries—the South fighting with the North. 
And as far as quality, what is quality infrastructure? It depends. What is the volume of 
traffic required from your airport or your seaport to your main capital and to your main 
industrial production zones? This is part of a queuing technique as you take probably in 
engineering or in financial management. You do not need a ten lane highway when you 
have got only 100 cars running a day. So this is all a question of your requirements 
based on the size of the economy. 
Now, with respect to the question from the Philippines; donor-driven is what you are 
suggesting. In my statement, I indicated clearly that there have been many changes. And 
you see to suggest that this ODA is mainly donor-driven is to suggest that the 
developing country decision-makers are all passive. And I would kindly disagree 
strongly with that. Many in the civil service of even poor governments have brains and 
have been highly educated. So they know and they can negotiate with the donor country 
to ensure that their prioprities are taken into account. 
As for Professor Kusano, I would like to thank him for his excellent work in preparing 
the commission draft of the policy recommendations on Japan’s ODA in the 21st 
century. I think this is the same Professor Kusano, Atsushi Kusano. I will give you a 
copy of my speech because I have you footnoted in my speech. 
I believe that we are here as government officials, but I did not clear this speech with 
Manila. I read documentation from the World Bank, from experts like you, from Heider 
Kahn, from F. Gini Govrigen—scholars who did an analysis on Japanese ODA. But I 
also was Director-General of the UN Industrial Development Organization from 
1985-1993 before I came here as Ambassador the first time. We, in the Philippines, 
certainly appreciate Japanese ODA. 
40 There are problems—with dams—you always have problems with the displaced people. 
And how is this reported? Every time you have a new peoject, the Japanese Ambassador 
is there; if some construction is involved, he participates in the ground breaking 
ceremony. When the project is completed, there is a big ceremony saying “Government 
of Japan Project” and the ceremony is covered in the news—including all the problems, 
all the complaints. We have a very free press in the Philippines. You can ask our friend 
from Akahata Newspaper who was based in Manila for a long time and who is here with 
us. He knows that. So this is how it is reported. 
Unfortunately, in the Philippines, most of the newspapers are in English. But on the 
radio, and on the television, they use local dialects and also the national language. 
Japanese ODA projects are, I would say, widely covered and they are gratefully 
received. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. Ambassador Cannabrava, would you like to take the 
floor at this time. 
Mr. Cannabrava: Yes, thank you very much. Well, I do not think I have to go through all 
the questions which have been answered by my colleague, the Ambassador from the 
Philippines. But I would like, however, to say to make a few comments. 
First of all, the first question concerning the concentration of ODA in Africa. Well, I 
have to say that we, as you probably know, Brazil has a very special link with Africa. I 
think you can say that together with the Cubans, we are the Africans in Latin America. I 
mean, half of the Brazilian population has African blood. There are very few Brazilians, 
including myself, who have not got African blood in their veins. So Africa for us is a 
continent to which we are indebted because it is a continent which has had an enormous 
influence on the development of the Brazilian society. 
So, I think that I fully agree that there has been a certain—I mean Africa has to receive 
with largesse, the money from any ODA program. Brazil herself, has dedicated part of 
our reserves, I mean we are not financially very powerful, but to help some African 
brother countries. But I would like to say that when this question, the question of ODA 
is not a static question. ODA is something which evolves. 
41 For instance in the case of Brazil, given this stage of development of Brazil, we are not 
entitled to some kinds of ODA anymore. As a matter of fact we are entitled to a few 
ones. But we have evolved to the point that now we discuss with the Japanese ODA 
officials trilateral cooperation. That means we cooperate with Japan in providing 
assistance in fields in which we have a very good technology, like tropical agriculture, 
like tropical disease, and we have developed a very important program in say Angola, in 
Mozambique, and we are about to start the same in East Timor. So I would like to say 
that it is difficult to say, I do not see ODA as a static thing, I mean just channeling 
resources, but it is something which provides many scenarios. And in these many 
scenarios, you have to have resources allotted to different regions. This is the comment I 
have concerning the first question. 
I think I was impressed by the question of the Professor from Keio University. I think it 
was a very interesting question. Of course, in my case, I do not have the same exposure 
as my colleague was besides Foreign Minister, and so he also worked, he did wonderful 
work at the UN. But I would say that we, today, I mean we try—although being 
officials—we try to be as transparent as we can. 
Of course there are some limitations in certain cases. But in this particular case, I mean, 
and I am going to answer on the part of Brazil, there is no limitation at all, because the 
only thing I have to tell you is that a very recent enquiry in Brazil in which there was, 
“What are the most loved countries in the world?” Japan was elected the number one. 
So I am not going to tell you which was the last one, but Japan was the first one. So it is 
not only because of ODA that we have very special links with Japan, but certainly 
Japanese ODA played a role. 
And if you look at the Brazilian press, if you look at the Brazilian associations, I mean 
in all fields, there is a feeling of gratitude and a very positive one. As my colleague said, 
there are complaints in certain cases. They say it is difficult to negotiate with the 
Japanese because the Japanese they have their own pattern of negotiation and you have 
to abide by it. But this is not a criticism—of course, we have to respect their way. But in 
principle, the assistance is well-received and I think it gives Japan a very positive image 
in my country. I think that I have—as myself of 40 years’ career—I do not remember 
any strong criticism that I would say. Well, there was a specific project in which they 
criticized Japan for ODA—no, I do not remember that. So I think that I could say that 
the answer to your question in the case of Brazil, and I would advance in the case of my 
42 region, in Latin America, is very, very positive. 
As to the interesting question—I am sorry, I am going back—that people have 
education; that people know how to read, they know how to write. But the IT revolution 
that we are trying to do in Brazil is important because it is also playing a very important 
role in the question of employment and unemployment, or disguised unemployment, as 
we have in Brazil. People who have access to computers and things like that, they can 
work, and they can have extra money. And of course the whole functioning of the 
country is changing. For instance, the income tax today in Brazil is done through the 
Internet. It has had a tremendous impact in Brazil. But of course what we do is this is 
used by a certain group, not by the whole country. They are a large segment of the 
population which has not yet access to this. And this is what we have to do to correct 
this distortion. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much, Ambassador. And now, I would like to call on 
Ambassador Mtango for his reaction to the questions and comments. 
Mr. Mtango: Thank you very much Mr. Yokota. I will make a brief comment on three 
points which were made from the floor. First is whether there should be more assistance 
from Africa. I thank the lady from Tokyo University for sympathizing with Africa. I 
think you are quite right. When I was looking at the percentage, relative percentages of 
assistance, I found that in the year 2001, Africa received 14.6% of total Japanese ODA 
as compared with 56.6% to Asia. But, having said that, it does not mean that the 
increase, which I think is deserving in Africa, should be at the expense of other Asian 
countries—not at all. But as you know the target figure of ODA set by the international 
community is 0.7% of the GDP, so there is room there as ODA increases to us reaching 
that target, then the increase could go more to Africa perhaps than other more endowed 
regions. Because, of course, yes, the situation in Africa is quite bad and it needs 
immediate assistance, but I repeat, it should not be at the expense of those who are 
already more privileged, but it should receive a greater proportion of the increase, which 
I am sure would be forthcoming, as the situation of the economies of developed 
countries continues to improve. 
Now, secondly, about IT. Yes, of course the digital divide has been a problem which has 
been identified by the Kyushu-Okinawa Summit, as well as various other summits that 
followed after the Okinawa Summit. That not just the poverty divide, and not just the 
43 income divide, but the digital divide, now, is also threatening the poor countries of the 
world. Now there is nothing one can do without IT in modern world, so certainly Africa 
must strive to benefit, and IT will be effective. 
Yes, of course, as Ambassador of the Philippines already stated, first thing is literacy, 
and many countries in Africa striving to reach that level. In the case of Tanzania, yes, 
we are going to reach that level by 2006, where all children would be in primary school. 
But as far affordability of computers is concerned, of course, that will take time before 
many families can afford computers. But what we are thinking is the creation of IT 
centers in various parts of the country. For example, at district headquarters; to have an 
IT center where people can come in and access into the Internet and get information 
about agriculture, about new technology, and read a lot of literature that is available at 
the Internet, and also be able to communicate with the rest of the world. And then 
gradually as the incomes of the people improve, then individual families can have 
computers at their own houses. But, of course, we cannot ignore the fact that the IT is an 
indispensable tool for modern day life, whether it be in developed or in developing 
countries. 
Now the last point I want to make is about the comment by the professor from Keio 
University. Yes, we are not speaking here as a representatives of government, but rather 
in a personal capacity. In the typical example of Tanzania, for example, there has been a 
very wide-scale grassroots support projects. And most of the provinces, villages, 
districts, have benefited from the grassroots support from Japan. And for this reason, 
yes, Japan is very popular to the man on the street. I will tell you one example that one 
of the most recent Ambassadors of Japan called Ambassador Keitaro Sato; anywhere he 
will go in Tanzania people shout his name, “Sato! Sato! Sato!” They know his name in 
person, because of the role of Japan’s assistance at grassroots level and the appreciation 
that the general public has towards Japanese assistance. 
So like in Brazil and I believe in a number of other countries, Japan is also number one 
preferred donor country. But, of course, we have many other friends also whose 
assistance we quite appreciate. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. Yes, Ambassador Siazon? 
Mr. Siazon: May I just comment, because I think what is happening is we are 
44 comparing; mixing up apples and oranges. When you look at these statistics for ODA to 
Japan, Africa and then Asia, you have to understand that Japanese ODA is in three parts: 
grant, technical cooperation and loans. Now, if you can put all the three together, of 
course, Asia is very big. Why? Because the loan part for Asia is extremely big, and 
loans are given to countries that are credit-worthy; that means that they can borrow. But 
since many of the African countries are not credit-worthy, they cannot get JBIC loans. 
So you have to compare only the grant part and the technical cooperation part, which is 
really given away. But exclude the loan part, then you will see, for example, that for the 
year 2001, the grant aid for Asia as a whole—this is not only East Asia—is US$727.51 
million; and for Africa it is US$614.42 million. So the disparity is not too great. And for 
the technical cooperation part—this is big, this part is—US$1.88 billion for Asia and 
US$223 million for Africa. But the loan part was US$2 billion 400 million for Asia, and 
I do not see any figure for Africa. So these things have to be borne in mind so that you 
have a better comparison of apples with apples, and oranges with oranges. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. We would like to hear from commentators, starting 
with you, Dr. Suganami, please. 
Mr. Suganami: Thank you very much for giving me an opportunity to comment. Well, 
for NGO “partnership” is a key word—sharing the hardships. And what is important 
about this, the local initiative based on the local values is the most important thing. And 
Professor Kusano mentioned it a short while ago. How much the Japanese ODA is taken 
up by local mass media, so the sponsorship is a word which is not liked very much. So 
JICA places the poverty reduction in its center, and why are poor people poor? There is 
no theoretical research work, and the quality infrastructure is a word mentioned by the 
man from Bangladesh. And so the good quality, high quality infrastructure development 
can be possible based on the good philosophy. 
And why are poor people poor? The professor says that even if they are capable and 
competent, if they are not given chances they cannot develop their competence. And so 
in 1998, President Clinton held the Conference on International Micro-Credit. And 
Grameen Bank has been very successful in Bangladesh, and so I think that in 
Bangladesh, Professor Yunus proposed this as a local initiative. And the Professor Singh 
from Bengal, India says that even if poor people are given chances, if they have not 
developed their capability they cannot make the good use of the chances given to them, 
45 and therefore the capacity development includes literacy. Therefore, the government is 
responsible for developing the capability, so Dr. Singh incorporated the concepts of 
welfare in the economic theory. So I think that this is very important that we have to 
employ this into Japanese ODA programs. So in regard to these micro-credit programs, 
we have to introduce local initiatives so that we can reduce poverty more effectively. 
Professor Kusano is very much interested how the Japanese ODA is evaluated by the 
local people, so I think that local initiatives based on the local values should be 
introduced more. And then I think that the Japanese ODA will be more and more 
appreciated by local people. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you. Mr. Kanda, please. 
Mr. Kanda: As Mr. Suganami mentioned, when it comes to quality assistance, quality 
education, quality cooperation—well, yes, I do indeed think that these are the important 
aspects. I, myself, do not have a clear-cut definition as Mr. Suganami has. But I think it 
basically means that each item of cooperation or each item of assistance is handed down 
to each recipient in a very clear-cut, transparent way. 
I think the way that this is done is the important aspect. And it has been the case in the 
last few years to try to do that. When we plan for a project, it is the participatory process. 
The plans, perhaps, are being made the government or by the JICA people or the survey 
team that was sent there; formerly, they were the ones who made those plans. But these 
days, there are participation from the stakeholders, and they, together, make the plans. I 
think that is the good quality assistance, and by doing that we can lead the whole project 
to a quality cooperation project. Thank you. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you. Mr. Harada? 
Mr. Harada: Thank you. Somebody raised the issue of IT. And indeed 
telecommunication or communication is indeed a very important thing. Particularly 
given the globalization, the role to be played by IT is very important. Of course, it is 
very often used for economic activities, but also in issues like landmines or climate 
change and so forth. What has really moved that climate change or landmine issues 
were the people, the citizens’ groups, the transnational civil societies that were 
connected through telecommunication, not just government. They were the ones who 
46 were connected by telecommunication and they had the network to raise their voice 
against climate change or against the landmines. And the African country, for them to 
come into that network, they would be needing education and hardware, and that is 
what can be provided by ODA, by assistance. 
The world is shrinking in many respects, and by recognizing that we are shrinking and 
becoming smaller, we even become smaller. The women going to Iraq as volunteers, 
and young people going there to Iraq as volunteers. Mr. Koda, for example, 
unfortunately he died, but he was motivated to go to Iraq—such a far away 
place—because he was motivated to do so by getting information through the 
telecommunication. The world is a small place. 
As for the peace talks in Sri Lanka, we know that Mr. Akashi was involved in it or is 
involved in it. And maybe some people think the Philippines is a place far away, but 
then if you go to the southernmost of Okinawa Islands, you know, the Tagalog 
newspapers come floating all the way from the Philippines—it is so close to the 
Philippines. And also Tinga Tinga pictures; Mr. Takano—he is Governor of Nagano—in 
his office you have a picture of Tinga Tinga. 
Then also Brazil; there is also a project being undertaken through the joint cooperation 
between Japan and Brazil. This is a forestation project, a re-forestation project 
undertaken. And the paper was to be brought to Japan, but now they have decided they 
would take the paper produced by to China, because they need paper. I think this kind of 
information is very important, and they often relayed through telecommunication. 
Mr. Yokota: Now, there was a question to Mr. Kodama. Mr. Kodama would you like to 
respond to that question? 
Mr. Kodama: Thank you very much. Our friend from the Philippines talked about the 
capacity building and good governance; the relationship between the two and how 
Japanese ODA can respond to the needs of good governance and capacity building. As 
Ambassador Siazon mentioned in his presentation, well, we on the part of the Japanese 
government would like to do a bit of a public relations (PR) activities. We revised 
Japanese ODA Charter completely last year and we talked about the assistance to 
developing countries through self-help efforts; and particularly the peace, 
democratization and so forth. These kinds of approaches will be positively supported by 
47 the Japanese ODA. There will be a priority based on countries that are undertaking 
these good governance peace activities, peace building and so forth. This is what we call 
the positive link. These are the countries, they have the priority. 
Then also, hard or soft, I do not know, but good governance really means that both the 
government and the private sectors in the recipient countries have very much to do with 
an individual’s capacity. And so through technical assistance or cooperation, we would 
like to give as much cooperation as possible. We are trying to give assistance in terms of 
coming and formulating policies to do that. 
Also, in Cambodia, Japan is now cooperating in one of the projects in Cambodia which 
tries to assist in one of the mass media projects in Cambodia. We have the so-called 
country-based approach. And we, on our part, when we were giving the end loans, and 
then the grant aid, we were not thinking about each country as an individual country. It 
was not a country-based strategy. There was the Poverty Reduction Strategic Paper 
(PRSP), and Japan was to align with that strategy paper. We need to try to secure that 
compliance and to do that Japan has come up with a comprehensive country-based 
strategies to align with some of the basic philosophies. 
And so by next year we would like to come up with a mid-term policy of ODA. ODA 
Charter is a big thing, and we would like to have a mid-term perspective. For example, 
human security, peace building, poverty reduction. Also, poverty reduction through 
sustainable growth. Now on each of these items, we are trying to come up with specific 
policies to promote that. When it comes to transparency, yes, we will get the public 
comments, we will get the comments from the Japanese NGOs, as well, so that we can 
come up with the results by the middle of January. 
Also, as for information disclosure, as Ms. Konno mentioned—the UNDP 
Ambassador—and we already started the monitor system participated by the general 
public. And we have the magazines and the website which gives this kind of 
information, and I would the people to use this kind of media as much as possible. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. We had very rich comments, very substantive 
comments. We have a few more minutes, so we can solicit a few more short questions; 
two or three questions and we will have them answered immediately. 
48 His Excellency Mr. Michael Maue, Ambassador from Papua New Guinea: ...the 
Ambassador from Papua New Guinea. I want to make some observations, if I may. First 
the review of the ODA program. In the review paper it did mention the interdependence 
of international community. I think that is very important because of the system that is 
given to countries and the importance of it to promote peace and stability throughout the 
region. And in that sense, of course, a lot of countries, including my own, appreciate the 
generous assistance through the ODA program that our countries have benefited. 
Especially on some these trends that, perhaps, could be build upon in the future. Of 
course, the continuation of the programs in build or rather identified with the donor 
countries that are in partnership with both the donor and the recipient. And I think that is 
important to build in the programs or the ODA assistance into the identified priorities of 
recipient government, so that both the recipients and the government—the Japanese 
government—work in tandem. 
The second important or rather the positive point is, of course, the country reports. The 
country reports are commissioned to and given the responsibility to individuals or 
instituations to carry out those independent reports—it is excellent. It is excellent 
because it enables the tax payers to appreciate—from an independent viewpoint—of 
how the ODA is performing in the recipient countries; and at the same time, it enables 
the recipient countries and the administration to benefit from the pluses and minuses, 
the negative aspects of implementation. So it works both ways; it gives the benefit to 
the tax papers and the general public—and that is what we have been concerned about, 
to make sure that there is sufficient support from the public; but at the same time it 
achieves that element of also reinforcing the cooperation and also enabling the donors 
and the mechanisms that it has, so that the country report is excellent in that respect. Of 
course, some of the activities that the NGOs have performed, and I think all around here 
there seems to be some general consensus that, yes, NGOs have an important role to 
play. They have expertise that in certain areas that can be utilized in all our countries; 
there are NGOs that have done an excellent job. 
The final positive point is, of course, the grassroots assistance program, and the 
Ambassador of Tanzania did mention. It is popular because it penetrates the very people 
that live in the rural areas. Joining water from, you know, from the shores that are many 
several kilometers away, or digging a well in areas where there is no water. It changes 
the lives of people and it means quite a lot. Grassroots programs are very popular, and i 
49 think that is important for the policymakers to keep that; to pay more attention to it, 
because it directly benefits rural communities where it matters most. I think that is the 
essence or importance of grassroot projects. 
If I may just touch on one aspect that perhaps we could look at in the future for further 
improvement, and that is the importance of identifying from a donor’s perspectives 
some of the impediments in the implementing agencies. Despite the priorities that may 
be placed, that may be legal personnel, software that may require both parties to sit 
down. But more importantly, from a donor perspective to identify those problems and 
sit down, because it assists beneficiaries to actually benefit or appreciate from a donor’s 
perspective, which may not be clear from the recipient. 
Another...in relation to having broad donor consultants in country. What will normally 
happen in any country, and I suspect maybe in many other too, is basically the 
implementing agency of that country dealing directly with JICA and Embassy officials. 
But it may be beneficial—and that is just a point that the Ambassador, sorry, the 
Professor from Keio has made; how do the general public know? Apart from the 
announcements and all that. It may be that you might have to open up a dialogue to 
everybody across communities—from government to private sector to NGOs to the civil 
society at large. And that is something that a few of our countries, including mine, that 
is what we are looking at in the long term. And I think that may be something that in the 
long term may be useful to look at. Thank you very much for the opportunity. 
Mr. Yokota: Well, thank you very much, Ambassador, for your very useful and helpful 
comments. I think that those are very important comments, but they do not necessarily 
need responses from the panelists. So I can perhaps entertain one brief comment or 
question. Or would you? Oh yes? Anyone? No? Okay, anybody who would like to raise 
some questions? Okay, please. 
Mr. Nakamura, Student, Chuo University: I am Nakamura, a student of Chuo University, 
and I have a question to Mr. Kodama and Mr. Harada. Well, ODA is assitance from 
developed countries to developing countries, and when the developing 
countries—recipient countries—become developed then ODA will have to be closed. 
And what are the conditions for these recipient countries to meet before they no longer 
receive ODA? For instance, now Japan is assisting China. What do you think about 
Japanese ODA toward China? 
50 Mr. Yokota: Well, thank you very much. A very important question. So please try to be 
very brief. First from Mr. Kodama. 
Mr. Kodama: Well, yes, the termination of ODA is a very important issue, and to be 
very brief, including China and other countries, grant is terminated when GDP per 
capita exceeds US$1400. And AMDA or World Bank—not mechanically, though—but 
are using this as a criteria to close grants. And then, the next step will be loans. And I 
said that the benchmark is US$1400, and another benchmark is US$3000 and when the 
country reaches this level then the loan aid is terminated as well. And in 2003 the GNI 
per capita in China is expected to reach or it is currently at US$1100, and therefore this 
is rather lower than US$1400. 
However, China has made remarkable economic progress. It has launched the manned 
spaceship, and so it has experienced remarkable technological developments, but still 
about 200 million people in China are living with less than US$1 a day. Therefore, I 
think that Japanese ODA will be very useful to let China will be more open to the 
international society. So I think that this is a very useful instrument for Japan to use, to 
approach China. 
Mr. Yokota: Thank you very much. From Mr. Harada, please. 
Mr. Harada: Well, I will be very brief about the termination of ODA. Yes, that is a 
criteria we currently use. And then the accountability is important. It is said that the 
people regard China as developed country; yes, it is the developed on the coastal areas, 
but in China there are three different kinds of societies live together: the poorest society 
and the middle-income society and developed society. So China is also building its 
military capability. So we have to also watch for China’s raction. 
Mr. Yokota: Well, thank you very much for very useful comments. We have only eight 
minutes that we can spend, so as a moderator I would like to summarize today’s 
discussion. 
Well, there are 13 points. In the past 50 years, Japan’s ODA has effectively assisted the 
governments and peoples of the developing countries. And generally, it is appreciated 
by the governments and peoples. However, more can, and perhaps should be done, to 
51 make Japan’s ODA more effective and useful. That is the first point. 
Second, ODA is essential, not only for the immediate objective of economic progress of 
developing countries, but also for the longer term purpose of bringing stability and 
peace to the developing countries with particularly internal conflicts. In this connection, 
more efforts can be put into peace building, including Disarmament, Demobilization 
and Reintegration (DDR), which somebody has mentioned, and conflict prevention and 
conflict management. That is the second point. 
Third point; for many developing countries, Japan is the largest donor. This is a 
welcome trend, but more should also be done in encouraging more investment from 
Japan, and also promoting agriculture by important agricultural products to Japan from 
developing countries. So that the trade relations is also considered as a part of ODA. 
The fourth point; while acknowledging that the amount of ODA is not the only concern 
of us. The purposes and objectives of ODA cannot be achieved without substantial 
amount of means, namely money. In this connection, the amount of Japan’s ODA should 
not be cut further, but rather be increased. Particularly to the level of internationally 
agreed figure of 0.7% of GNP; this was mentioned by the Sri Lankan Ambassador 
before he left. 
Number five; it is important to increase Japanese public awareness of the importance of 
Japanese ODA in order to increase public support to Japan’s efforts to assist developing 
countries. In this connection, more efforts should be made to achieve transparency of 
the ODA and also publicity. Mention was made in connection with good governance in 
connection with ODA implementation. And also, the need for institutional build up, and 
also the need for—general speaking—high quality ODA assistance. 
Number six; Japan should do more to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 
the developing countries, as well as various UN organs and agencies. Particular 
attention should be given to the eradication of extreme poverty. Here, mentions were 
made in connection with a need to emphasize on human development and human 
security. 
Seven; the role of NGOs and civil society organizations in carrying out the ODA should 
be stressed and further promoted. 
52 Number eight; private sector—that is business circle—should not be ignored in 
promoting ODA efforts to assist developing countries. More should be done by the 
Japanese government to increase Japanese investment in developing countries. 
Nine; more efforts should be made to increase assistance to basic quality infrastructure 
in terms of roads, bridges and power lines and so on. Also, the soft infrastructure, such 
as educational system and training centers and so on should be focused. 
Number ten; in providing ODA, Japan should pay more careful attention to the 
environmental implications of such assistance, and also human rights implications of 
such assistance. 
And 11; potential for new types of ODA should be explored. And, in fact, some of them 
have already been done in an explorary manner, but mention was made in connection 
with Brazilian efforts. For example, assistance to developing countries; in order to let 
them assist much less developed countries. An example was given by the Brazilian 
Ambassador about Brazil’s efforts to assist Angola, East Timor and Mozambique, which 
are Portuguese-speaking countries, and therefore Brazil has a special position to assist 
them. And Brazil also needs some money in order to carry out this assistance effectively. 
I think South-South cooperation should be more emphasized. 
Also, peace building and nation building, post-conflict reconstruction—those should be 
also subjects to be supported by the Japanese ODA. Mention was made in connection 
with the need to fight back the threat from contagious diseases, such as human 
immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS), malaria 
and so on. We should also pay attention to the needs of assisting refugees in connection 
with Japanese ODA. Also, I think Ambassador Siazon mentioned about the use of 
Japanese ODA to further regional economic integration in Southeast Asia. 
The 12th point; ODA is not one way direction—that means donor-recipient relationship. 
It is a mutual and interdependent relationship, and this connection participation of local 
people, the partnership with the local people and the government and ownership of the 
recipient government should be emphasized. This is important, for example, to make 
Japanese foreign policy more effective in the world. It would, for example, Japanese 
ODA would also advance the general Japanese image among the recipient countries. 
53 And also, I think there is an important element in encouraging Japanese young people to 
learn more about developing countries. We need assistance from developing countries to 
increase the knowledge and experience in developing countries’ history, economy and 
politics and culture. 
Now, the 13th point; there is some element of disagreement and this relates to which 
region Japan should place emphasis on. And Asia, naturally, has been the most 
important area, but also Africa should be more central focus of Japanese ODA, and of 
course, Latin America should not be forgotten. I think, although, if we ask each 
Ambassador which region is important, it is difficult for them to answer because if each 
Ambassador comes from a particular region they would naturally think that each region 
is important. But, at the same time, I think regions are not isolated from the rest of the 
world, and regions are interdependent. Just one region making progress and forgetting 
the economic development of other region, it would not solve the problem of 
development in the world. 
I assume that the general consensus in this connection is that perhaps Japan’s ODA 
should be more aligned, more sensitized to the needs of each region and each country. 
Some countries need basic infrastructure in education and so on. Other countries may 
not need that anymore, but still needs investment from Japan and encouraging Japanese 
businesses to go in that region and in that country. 
In the case of Sub-Saharan African countries, I think poverty eradication and immediate 
humanitarian assistance in terms of health and humanitarian assistance in refugees and 
so on should be also the focus of Japanese ODA. So with regard to the regional 
emphasis, it is not so much of the amount to be allocated to each region, but the most 
important thing is to understand the needs of each region and Japanese ODA be 
provided to meet such needs. 
I think I tried to summarize, but the discussion has been so rich that I am sure that I 
missed many of the important points, but those are the important elements that I thought 
should be mentioned in my concluding observation. 
Now, the time has passed and unfortunately, I realize many other people wanted to raise 
questions and make comments, but the time is limited. The only hope is that the Foreign 
Ministry and JICA and UNU will be able to co-sponsor similiar sessions in the future. 
54 Perhaps in the future the Bangladesh Ambassador should also be on the panel. And 
maybe Ghanian or Nigerian Ambassador should be on the panel and so on. But this is 
something that we should consider in the future. I thank the panelists for excellent 
cooperation with us and good responses to the questions. Thank you very much for your 
cooperation. 
Ms. Shimizu: Well, thank you very much all the participants. Well, this concludes 
today’s symposium commemorating the 50th anniversary of Japanese ODA. Thank you 
very much for your kind cooperation. 
Thank you very much, Professor Yokota. Thank you very much and to all the 
participants and all the panelists. Well, thank you very much for your very imformative 
presentations and opinions and responses. 
This concludes today’s event entitled, “The View on the Japanese ODA in the Recipient 
Countries”. Participants, please fill in the questionnaire sheets when you leave the hall. 
And please leave the headsets for simultaneous interpretation service on the desk. 
Thank you very much. 
55