Food Cultures as Cultural Property

Food Cultures as Cultural Property- New Expansion of Intangible Folk Cultural Properties

IMAISHI Migiwa (Senior Researcher, Tokyo National Research Institute for Cultural Properties)

Introduction

In this paper, I shall attempt to sort issues related to food culture as cultural property.

I wish to begin by discussing some preconditions regarding this topic. Firstly, survey results indicate that the general public holds extremely high expectations of food culture. For example, in a survey conducted in 2019 on “What kind of cultural promotion initiatives do you wish to see as a means for Japan’s cultural development,” close to 50% of respondents gave “food culture” as their response, topping manga, anime, and “local festivals and cultural properties” by a significant margin (Emi Kataoka, 2022, “Comparison of genres of anticipated cultural promotion initiatives – Based mainly on nationwide survey data,” Komazawa Journal of Sociology, vol. 59).

Another similar survey is the “Public opinion survey on culture” conducted by the Agency for Cultural Affairs. The survey itself has been carried out since 1987, but from 2003, a question has been added that asks respondents, “What areas do you think should be more actively developed to widely introduce Japan’s culture to the world?” This is a multiple-choice question that allows multiple answers. Since 2009, “food culture” has consistently ranked among the top three answers, whereas in 2003, it was not even included among the multiple choices. It could thus be said that the importance of protecting local foods as a culture came to be nationally recognized between 2003 and 2009.

1. Developments concerning “food as culture”: Japan and the World

1) Food culture within national policies

An extremely important development took place between 2003 and 2009. That is the promulgation and enforcement of the Basic Act on Shokuiku (Food and Nutrition Education) in 2005. This law expressly states that food and nutrition education is an important matter to be promoted by the country, to improve dietary habits, secure food safety, and address the sense of crisis that Japan’s rich and diverse food culture may be lost. Article 7 of the law includes the expression “traditional food culture,” and states that food and nutrition education must be promoted “in consideration of Japan’s distinctive traditional food culture, diets reflecting regional characteristics, and environmentally friendly food production, consumption and other stages of the food supply chain.”

Enforcement of the Basic Act on Shokuiku (Food and Nutrition Education) had an extremely large impact on public and private developments thereafter. One is the Food Culture Research Promotion Panel, a private-sector panel launched under the support of the Intellectual Property Strategy Council Secretariat in the Cabinet Office. Appointed as vice chairman was Mr. Isao Kumakura, who later played a key role in nominating Washoku to UNESCO. The panel proposed that a greater understanding of Japan’s food culture should be promoted among all citizens and that Japan’s food culture should be introduced abroad as a “Japan brand.” In response to this, it was explicitly stated in the Intellectual Property Promotion Plan (2005) issued by the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and others that “the achievements of specific initiatives taken by the Food Culture Research Promotion Panel… shall be proactively incorporated in governmental policies.”

As I understand it, the move to inscribe Washoku on UNESCO’s Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage in 2013 occurred as an extension of the above developments. There are various requirements for a property to be nominated to the list, and one of them is that the property being nominated must be listed in the country’s inventory (list of cultural properties, in Japan’s case). Back then, however, Japan did not even have a law yet that defined food culture as cultural property. To get around this fact, a cultural property list was attached to the actual application document that included all the familiar Important Intangible Cultural Properties, Important Intangible Folk Cultural Properties, and Selected Conservation Techniques under “I. Designated or selected elements based on the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties,” and Washoku as the sole item under “II. Included element based on the decision of the Council for Cultural Affairs of the Government.” In this way, Washoku was nominated to UNESCO using a tricky course of action, so to speak. A look at the nomination file shows a passage that reads: “The Council and the Special Committee agreed to two points… 1) they will establish a new category of intangible cultural heritage in the inventory even though it is not covered under the “Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties” and, 2) they will include the element in this new category” (underline by the author). In other words, Washoku was being nominated as an element under a newly established category, which means food culture was not yet a cultural property at this time.

Thereafter, the Basic Act for the Promotion of Culture and the Arts was amended in 2017, and food culture was specified as an example of “” Even so, cultural properties and lifestyle culture, or cultural properties and food culture, continued to be treated as two separate items. It is written in Article 12 of the act that the country shall promote “lifestyle culture (tea ceremony, flower arrangement, calligraphy, food culture),” but it is written separately in Article 13 that it shall promote “cultural properties and their preservation techniques.”

Around the time that the Basic Act for the Promotion of Culture and the Arts was amended in 2017, the social atmosphere, as many of you may remember, was such that there were various movements to link cultural policies with economic policies, with the Olympic and Paralympic Games scheduled to be held in 2020. Within this situation, the government’s Cool Japan Strategy and Cultural Economic Strategy focused on “food” as an effective cultural element having the power to support Japan’s economic growth. There was an air of strong interest in food in various sectors particularly in terms of food culture as a resource for economic strategies and tourism.

It was perhaps along this trend that the National Tax Agency organized a study group for the development of global brand strategies for Japanese sake in 2019 and announced its desire to inscribe sake as a UNESCO intangible cultural heritage. This plan was based on the agency’s perspective that sake is a culture that can “earn a fortune,” because obviously, it wished to expand the consumption of sake to collect the liquor tax paid on it. Whatever the reason, however, this movement led to the Cabinet approval of the “Follow-up on the Growth Strategy” in 2020, and in 2021, then Prime Minister Suga announced his intention to nominate sake as a UNESCO intangible cultural heritage. To my understanding, this is how nominating Japanese sake as a UNESCO intangible cultural heritage came to be the established course of action, in some sense.

The Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties was amended also within this trend of events. I am of the impression that it was done extremely speedily. A planning and survey meeting was held five times within a short period between October and December 2020, and a report was announced the following January. A draft amendment of the law was then submitted to the ordinary session of the Diet which convened soon thereafter, and the amended law was promulgated in April. In June, the amended law was partially put into force, in July, recommendations were made regarding the first for registration (Sanuki soy sauce and Tosa dried bonito), and in September, the items were officialized as registered intangible folk cultural properties. In October, recommendations were made to register traditional sake brewing and calligraphy as intangible cultural properties, and they were officially registered in December. It was in March of the following year that the decision was made to nominate traditional sake brewing as a UNESCO intangible cultural heritage. In this way, the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties was amended with extreme speed. When Washoku was inscribed on UNESCO’s list of intangible cultural heritage in 2013, it had been nominated without having been properly designated as a cultural property yet, but sake brewing was nominated upon being designated as a registered cultural property.

I have given a brief rundown of the schedule of events above to emphasize that although a system was put into place, there is still the issue of how to operate it hereafter. As I will discuss below, a great many people are concerned with and involved in food culture. I think there is still much to think about even as we continue to move forward, including how best to reach a consensus among all parties concerned. Besides the central government, many local governments in particular will probably be considering the registration or designation of their local food culture. This conference was planned with the wish to gather all parties concerned and discuss how the system that has been established with much effort can be utilized effectively. The fact that a registration system has been established and that lifestyle culture and food culture have come to be recognized as new genres of culture is certainly a welcome development, in terms of the fact that objects for protection have increased and the means for protection have been strengthened. All that needs to be done is to think about how best to operate it and utilize it.

 

2) Global trends concerning food as a culture

These figures (Figs. 1 & 2) show what kinds of foods are inscribed on UNESCO’s list of intangible cultural heritage. I will skip the details as we do not have enough time, but if you are interested, please take a close look later on.

Fig.1 : List of ICH related to food cultures

Fig.2: History and recent trends related to food culture as ICH

2. The spreading of food as cultural property

1) Legal status of food culture

Allow me to talk a little bit more about preconditions regarding the legal status of food culture. As I have noted earlier, the Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties was recently amended, but the amended law does not actually contain the term “food culture.” The term “cultural properties” is defined in the General Provisions (Law for the Protection of Cultural Properties, Chapter 1, General Provisions, Article 2), but no changes whatsoever were made to the General Provisions in the recent amendment. Therefore, as before, intangible cultural properties are described as “drama, music, craft techniques, and other intangible cultural products,” and folk cultural properties are described as including “manners and customs, folk performing arts, and folk techniques” related to food, clothing, and housing, livelihoods, religious faiths, and so on. There is no additional mention of food culture anywhere in the law itself.

The fact is, mention of food culture or lifestyle culture was newly made within the Ministry of Education’s public notice regarding “standards for registration of intangible cultural properties,” in a new paragraph on “Elements related to lifestyle culture” which was added at the same level as performing arts and crafts. However, the term “food culture” does not appear in this paragraph, either. A double-barreled approach is taken, guiding readers to refer to the earlier mentioned Basic Act for the Promotion of Culture and the Arts for a detailed description of lifestyle culture. In the Basic Act, food culture appears at long last as an “example.” Incidentally, although lifestyle culture was added to the public announcement of registration standards, no mention of it was made in reference to designated cultural properties, or in other words the “standards for designation of Important Intangible Cultural Properties.” I understand this to mean that, as matters stand, the government has registered lifestyle culture, including food culture, as an intangible cultural property but it does not intend to give it designation as a designated cultural property.

Meanwhile, hardly any legal changes have been made concerning folk cultural properties. This means that this category has a large degree of flexibility to the contrary, such that food culture could perhaps be defined, registered, or designated within the existing scope that includes manners and customs, folk performing art, and folk techniques. In fact, the Food Culture Working Group under the Agency for Cultural Affairs defines food culture as a conglomerate culture of food-related manners and customs and techniques, and a look at food culture-related intangible folk cultural properties that have been nationally designated or registered in recent years shows that properties that tend toward folk techniques have been designated or registered. This seems to reflect the situation in which the government is presently focusing on designating or registering mainly folk techniques because the designation or registration of manners and customs would make it difficult to specify the object for protection and implement protection measures.

 

2) Food culture as seen from the perspective of cultural property administration

Next, I shall discuss what food culture means from the perspective of cultural property administration. Firstly, the concept of food culture was first proposed in the latter half of the 1970s. It was suggested that various academic disciplines such as dietetics and food preparation which were each studied separately should be studied comprehensively in combination with other fields of study in natural sciences and social sciences. From this ensued an academic movement to regard food as a comprehensive culture, “from the production and acquisition of food ingredients to their distribution, cooking, nutrition, tableware, kitchen, eating manners, eating places, setup and cleanup, disposal, and excretion” (Isao Kumakura, ed., 2021, “Washoku – Traditional Food Culture of the Japanese,” Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries).

Food culture is thus a compounded concept. From the perspective of cultural property administration, however, or in other words the perspective of manners and customs and folk techniques which are the existing areas of the conventional understanding of folk cultural properties, food largely differs in the aspects discussed below.

First of all, food is the “foundation of life” without which we cannot survive if we do not eat it every day. It is also the “foundation of social living.” There is the expression in Japanese, “to eat from the same pot.” I think this fundamentally means that food is to be eaten with someone else and that it is something that connects people to people, be it a meal with members of one’s family or community or a ceremonial feast in the presence of a god. Food is two-sided. It has an extremely personal aspect to it as a means for life sustenance, but it simultaneously has a widespread aspect as the basis of communities. I think this is a salient difference with festivals, folk performing arts, and folk techniques. Food is also two-sided in that it is undeniably an everyday affair, something that is part of our daily lives, but it also constitutes special occasions in the form of special meals. Furthermore, I think it is extremely important to note that with performing arts and festivals, a certain community is the torchbearer of the culture, but with food, if there are a hundred people, all hundred people are bearers of the food culture.

In the light of cultural protection, these characteristics pose a challenge in terms of the marked diversity and changes in food. Food is a “living cultural property.” Intangible cultural properties are living cultural properties, to begin with, and they are subject to change with the times. Even so, changes in food are more prominent compared to festivals and performing arts. How to protect food, which is characterized by diversity and changes such that even next-door neighbors living in the same era eat different foods, and whether to protect it or not, is an extremely difficult issue. On the other hand, everyone can be a bearer of food culture without playing an active part in it and personally cooking dishes, but simply by eating and purchasing food. This is an especially significant point. In short, food may trigger people who have never been interested in culture and cultural property administration to take an interest. In this sense, I think food is a highly promising genre. Additionally, the more people who are involved means the more people will play an active role and the more budget will flow. In this sense as well, I am of the impression that this is a genre that has great potential.

 

3) Nationwide initiatives related to food culture

Here, I would like to introduce food culture-related initiatives other than those implemented by the Agency for Cultural Affairs. Firstly, many intangible cultural properties related to food have been designated or selected by nationwide prefectures and municipalities. Among them, two well-known pioneering initiatives are Nagano Prefecture’s “Cultural Property of Taste” and “Shiga Food Cultural Property.” In brief, Nagano Prefecture’s “Cultural Property of Taste” was selected in 1983 as an intangible folk cultural property requiring special measures such as the creation of records. This was realized as a result of a proposal made in 1981 by geographer who served as a member of a cultural property protection review committee in Nagano Prefecture at the time. It is said to be the first food cultural property in Japan, and it initially included five selected items: yakimochi (baked rice cake), goheimochi (rice cake unique to the region), nozawana (pickled turnip greens), handmade soba (buckwheat noodles), and sunki (turnip leaves pickled with plant lactic acid bacteria). Today, I am told it consists of thirteen items, including yubeshi (a type of sweet rice cake) and misodengaku (miso-glazed konjac). In addition to these two initiatives, various other food-related elements, such as cooking methods, dietary habits, sake brewing, and tea processing techniques, have been designated or selected as cultural properties by local governments throughout Japan.

There are also initiatives related to cultural heritage as an area that is close to cultural properties. For example, the UNESCO Creative Cities Network, created in 2004 as a UNESCO project, is engaging in various undertakings. Tsuruoka City in Yamagata Prefecture was acknowledged in 2014 and Usuki City in Oita Prefecture was acknowledged in 2021 as cities in the food culture category of the network. Japan Heritage is another initiative. Presently, 104 sites are certified as Japan Heritage sites, including many that are themed on food culture. When including those that mention food culture in their component properties, there are close to 30 food-related Japan Heritage sites, and various initiatives are already underway at each site.

Some other initiatives that happened to catch my eye include Japan’s first food-based town planning ordinance, which was established in Obama City, Fukui Prefecture in 2002. It states that policies will be implemented under the keyword of “food” as the starting point for the reorganization of local industries, and various initiatives are being implemented in line with this ordinance. The city is also making active efforts to disseminate information on its food culture from its bases in public facilities such as the Miketsukuni Wakasa Obama Food Culture Museum. Nagano Prefecture is also implementing a variety of initiatives to protect food ingredients. It has branded its food ingredients under the name “Delicious Shinshu Food,” where “food” is a pun on the Japanese word of the same sound which means “local climate,” and is actively disseminating information about the brand. The prefecture has also begun to implement in stages a system for certifying traditional vegetables, in 2006.

At the national level, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries is engaged in various initiatives. In December 2022, it released on its website a page titled “The situation regarding Japan’s food culture.” It has proven to be a treasure trove of preliminary case examples of surveys and studies, human resource development, awareness-raising activities, networking initiatives, and inbound strategies. The Japan Tourism Agency is also introducing initiatives related to food, including Green Tourism and farm stay programs.

Initiatives are being taken not only by the public sector but by the private sector, as well. For example, Kibun, a manufacturer mainly of fish-paste products, is conducting a nationwide survey of fish and foods that are eaten to celebrate the New Year. Similarly, Mizkan, a manufacturer mainly of vinegar and food products, is conducting a nationwide survey of the ratio of salt and sugar contained in sushi vinegar.

In these ways, numerous food initiatives are already being taken in various sectors. As such, I wish to gain your understanding that cultural property administration is more of a newcomer in this area. There is also the issue of how cultural property administration may coordinate its efforts with such a diversity of stakeholders and their diverse initiatives.

3. Issues regarding food culture as cultural property

Lastly, I have derived four categories of issues regarding food culture as cultural property.

 

1) Gaining a perspective on change and diversity

The first issue is how to gain a perspective on change and diversity. This can be approached from two viewpoints. One is how to conduct surveys, in terms of whose food in which time era should be surveyed. Given that food is subject to drastic changes, should surveys target “traditional” food of times before the period of high economic growth, or should they target “modern” food? And “whose” food should be targeted? For example, when surveying the kiritampo (skewered rice cake) of Akita Prefecture, should a survey visit be made to a business or a regular household, and if a visit is to be made to a regular household, whose household should be visited? There is also the issue of how to describe tastes, since food is something that disappears after it is eaten. I believe taste varies according to the physical condition of the person eating the food. If so, subjective documentation of food poses a challenge. Keeping a recipe might be an effective way to document taste, but any changes in the taste and manufacturing method of seasonings would change the final taste. It might also raise the concern that one recipe will come to be considered “authentic” while excluding all others.

The second viewpoint, and an extremely difficult one, is how to assess diversity and change. For example, even if the cooking method is the same, how should the addition of a new ingredient be assessed? How about the use of new seasoning? Or, if a certain food is eaten in an area that is not its place of origin owing to physical distribution, how should this situation be assessed? This question also applies to food that is eaten irrelevantly from its original purpose. For example, botamochi (sweet red bean rice ball) used to be eaten specifically during the week of the equinox, but it can now be purchased in supermarkets year-round. How should this be assessed? Additionally, the Agency for Cultural Affairs promotes an initiative called “100 Year Food,” but the status of relatively new foods is ambiguous. Let us take okonomiyaki (Japanese savory pancake) as an example since I am from Hiroshima. Okonomiyaki is an iconic food of Hiroshima that locals have always loved, but can it be considered a traditional food culture? Another example is the attempt to promote traditional or local cuisine in today’s busy times by proposing time-saving recipes or creating meal kits. How should these ideas be assessed? There are many such issues to consider.

 

2) How should food be protected?

The second issue is how to protect food. Put differently, an issue lies in identifying the archetype and main bearer of a food culture. This is probably the primary reason why the Agency for Cultural Affairs is pushing forward with the registration of food with a particular focus on folk techniques. There is the question of where to draw the line, as food culture is subject to change, is diverse, or displays regional expansion. On one hand, if “archetype” is interpreted in the wide sense of the word, the scope of protection could become ambiguous. On the other hand, if it is interpreted in the narrow sense of the word, diversity may be lost.

How to identify the bearer of a food culture and how to provide support is another question. There is a particularly large problem in how to treat local cuisine and foods that are eaten in each household. However, local cuisine holds great potential for local governments that are considering promoting their food culture, so I would like to hear your views about what ought to be protected.

 

3) Balance between protection and utilization

The third issue is about the balance between protection and utilization. Even when talking about utilization alone, measures to be taken would differ completely depending on whether emphasis is placed on awareness raising or food education, or on regional promotion through food sales. Thus, it would be necessary to clarify a direction of action before food utilization measures can be taken. Additionally, there is the issue of commercial use and intellectual property rights. For example, if a recipe is shared on the internet and someone living in a completely different region sees it and makes it, would that be acceptable? To begin with, the Basic Act on Shokuiku (Food and Nutrition Education) that I mentioned earlier was established in 2005 out of a strong sense of crisis and problem awareness that something far different from “authentic” Japanese food is being sold in foreign countries as “Japanese food.” Therefore, there is the possibility that the issue of intellectual property rights might become a large problem.

 

4) Roles of the central government, local governments, and researchers

Lastly, I think it would be ideal if the central government, local governments, and researchers can play their respective roles in the protection of food culture. This is particularly important in terms of what part they should each play in the protection, for example, of extremely local food culture and food culture that has spread throughout the country. I will not go into details here, however, as I have limited time. Please let me proceed to my next point.

As we have seen, there are many stakeholders and various initiatives already being undertaken, so my last point is about the meaning and roles of protecting food culture as cultural property. I think we need to consider and share our thoughts on the significance of engaging in food culture not simply as a resource for industrial promotion but as cultural property. In short, I think it is necessary to clearly discuss, from the outset, what, who, how, and for what purpose we ought to protect our food culture. Thank you very much.