Rural Minamiminowa’s 1.76 Birth Rate and 150 Years of Growth
How Childcare Innovation, Affordable Living, and Welcoming Traditions Built Japan’s Rural Revival Model
According to Yoshitaka Asada's case study "人口が増え続ける村の基層：長野県南箕輪村の事例から (The Foundation of a Village with Continuously Growing Population: A Case Study of Minamiminowa Village, Nagano Prefecture)," while Japan faces a severe nationwide population crisis, Minamiminowa Village in Nagano Prefecture has continuously grown its population for 150 years — a remarkable achievement that offers lessons for rural revitalization in a country where "village extinction" has become a common concern.
By the numbers
16,063 people live in Minamiminowa Village (as of October 2023)
73.3% of residents are transplants from elsewhere
1.76% fertility rate — the highest in Nagano Prefecture
50% of management positions in village administration are held by women (up from just 7.7% in 2016)
64% of all village employees are women
~10,000 yen per square meter average land price (significantly lower than in urban areas)
Five daycare centers plus a specialized facility for children with disabilities
150 years of continuous population growth since the village's founding in 1875
Geographic advantage with a twist
Location matters: The village sits in the Ina Valley of central Nagano, nestled between the Central and Southern Japanese Alps.
Despite not being in a major metropolitan commuter zone, it's accessible via the Ina Interchange of the Chuo Expressway
Just a 2-hour drive from Nagoya and 2.5 hours from Tokyo
The village area is split, with the western half being uninhabited mountains and the eastern half a gently sloping residential area
Residents describe the landscape as "picture book-like"
Between the lines: The area was historically considered less desirable for habitation due to poor water management, which kept land prices low despite its natural beauty. However, this historical disadvantage has transformed into a modern advantage, providing affordable land for new residents in a pattern that village mayor Fujiki Hidebumi notes is distinct from purely structural factors that drive population growth in urban areas.
Leadership that prioritized children first
Political commitment: Former mayor Karaki Kazunao, who took office in 2005, faced criticism for prioritizing child support when other issues seemed more pressing. He persisted with his vision of creating "Japan's number one village for child-rearing" despite opposition.
Participatory governance:
The village initiated "middle school student mock assemblies" starting in 2017 where students could voice concerns directly
A "women's mock assembly" was held in 2018 allowing mothers to express their needs to the administration
Agricultural development initiatives specifically sought input from young mothers
Long-term vision: This leadership established a pattern of prioritizing children and families that continued through multiple administrations, creating consistency in policy direction.
Comprehensive family support system
Early investment in family-friendly policies: The village began systematically reducing childcare fees in 2005, years before such policies became common elsewhere:
Four consecutive years of fee reductions (5%, 3.8%, 4.2%, and 3.5%) starting in 2005
Further reductions of 2.07%, 8.4%, and 1.82% in 2012, 2015, and 2018
Extended free healthcare coverage incrementally:
2006: Elementary school 3rd grade
2007: Elementary school 6th grade
2008: Junior high school 3rd grade
2013: High school 3rd grade
Established scholarship and educational assistance programs by 2008
Created integrated child-rearing consultation services by 2010
Implemented subsidized childcare for sick children (made free in 2012)
Opened a "Neubola"-style one-stop child support center in 2017
Established a total support center for women's re-employment in 2016
Philosophy of local care: The village maintains five daycare centers despite its small size, plus a specialized childcare facility for children with disabilities called "Takenoko Garden." This reflects the village's philosophy that "village children should be raised in the village" rather than sending them to facilities in larger neighboring municipalities.
Beyond child support: Despite being known for child support, the village also maintains strong elderly and disability services comparable to neighboring municipalities, including transportation assistance, nursing care subsidies, and home support services.
Diverse economic foundations
Employment diversity: The village benefits from multiple employment sectors:
Automotive, electronics, precision machinery, and IT companies located near the Ina Interchange (established in 1976)
Agricultural opportunities with diverse crops (rice, apples, asparagus, and flowers) — described as a region where "anything can be grown"
Service sector jobs available in neighboring Ina City and Minowa Town
Approximately 30% of residents commute to Ina City and 10% to Minowa Town
Educational continuum: Unlike many rural areas where children must leave for education:
The village offers everything from preschools through high school locally
Shinshu University's Faculty of Agriculture and Nagano Prefectural South Institute of Technology provides higher education options
This reduces the educational out-migration common in rural areas
Integrated regional economy: Minamiminowa functions within the larger "Ina Region Settlement Area" and "Upper Ina Wide-Area Union," collaborating with neighboring municipalities on residence policies, waste management, and medical welfare services.
The cultural difference
The village's most distinctive feature isn't captured in statistics — it's what researchers and residents describe as a uniquely welcoming community culture.
What they're saying:
"There's a feeling of being accepted without excessive scrutiny," reported one transplant
Another noted: "They don't dig too deeply into your past; questions that would be asked in one day elsewhere might take six months here"
On local traditions: "They told me 'We're supposed to have you join as a shrine member, but it's really up to you.' When they approach it that way, it makes me want to participate"
Compared to other municipalities: "Other places can be strict about traditional customs and impose a burden on newcomers... here things are much more relaxed"
Intentional inclusion: Village officials deliberately avoid creating separate "transplant communities":
When asked about creating immigrant support groups, one administrator responded: "We deliberately don't create them" to avoid segregating newcomers
The strategy focuses on allowing migrants to integrate naturally rather than being permanently labeled as "transplants"
This creates what researchers call "appropriately weak ties" — connections that provide support without overbearing social pressure
Go deeper: This cultural openness has evolved partly because transplants represent most of the population (73.3%). Unlike communities where newcomers must conform to entrenched norms, Minamiminowa has developed a culture that continuously adapts to new residents.
Research framework and national context
The study positions Minamiminowa's experience within Japan's broader demographic crisis, which has been anticipated for decades through discussions of aging society, declining birth rates, and "marginal villages."
Theoretical perspectives: The research builds on competing frameworks for understanding population decline:
Social systems sustainability: Policy-focused approaches concerned with maintaining public infrastructure, national finances, and labor force. This perspective, which treats population decline as a social problem requiring policy intervention, gained prominence after the Japan Creation Council's 2014 research "visualized" the potential extinction of many municipalities, creating a sense of crisis.
Lifestyle sustainability: Community-focused approaches advocated by scholars like Hiroi Yoshinori (who proposes a "steady-state society/sustainable welfare society") that emphasize the internal capacities of people and places to maintain quality of life despite population changes.
Radical critique: Some scholars like Akagawa Manabu take a more radical position, arguing that population policies and discourse are often based on flawed assumptions about population growth and gender equality. This perspective suggests treating childbirth and childcare as matters of individual self-determination rather than national policy concerns.
Minamiminowa offers insights into how these approaches can interact productively, showing how policy interventions and community adaptability can reinforce each other.
Methodology: The case study draws on interviews with village officials, staff from support organizations, and migrants to the village, along with an analysis of village documents and statistics.
Research limitations:
The study primarily captured the experiences of successful, stable migrants rather than those who struggled to integrate
There remains a question of whether the village's unique culture preceded its population growth or resulted from it
The research focuses primarily on the period after 2005, though population growth has been continuous since the village's founding
The bottom line
Minamiminowa's success comes from a rare combination of factors:
Structural advantages (affordable land, strategic location, employment options)
Intentional policy choices (early investment in family support, female empowerment)
Cultural openness and flexibility that feels welcoming to newcomers
Consistent leadership vision prioritizing children and families
What sets it apart is the cultural flexibility that one resident described as "the freedom to live how you want while still being accepted as a villager." As Japan continues grappling with demographic decline, Minamiminowa demonstrates that rural communities can thrive by combining practical support systems with an open, flexible community ethos.
While the case began as an examination of policy-driven revitalization ("problem-solving" approach), it ultimately reveals the equal importance of community culture and adaptability ("life practice" approach) — suggesting that successful regional revitalization requires both dimensions working together.
isnt this clearly just selection bias?