The 2025 ‘Rice Riot’ and the Framing of Moral Panic

In early 2025, Japanese consumers began reporting empty shelves in the rice aisles of supermarkets and convenience stores across the country. National broadcasters featured segments on rising prices and regional supply disruptions, while social media platforms circulated speculation about hoarding, governmental mismanagement, and imminent national food insecurity. This discursive pattern coalesced into a now-circulating term, “令和の米騒動” (Reiwa no kome sōdō)—Reiwa Rice Riot¹— a deliberate invocation of the 1918 rice riots that brought down the Terauchi cabinet.

Despite the absence of systemic breakdown in rice production or distribution, the perceived shortage rapidly produced panic buying, local inflation, and accelerated depletion of household stock. What began as a marginal media concern evolved into a collectively enacted moral panic, in which the affective force of historical analogy—rice as both staple and symbol—overwhelmed the evidentiary clarity of supply-chain metrics. This post argues that the so-called ‘Reiwa Rice Riot’ must be understood not as a failure of agricultural output, but as a culturally coded event revealing the fragility of Japan’s post-growth agrarian infrastructure, the demographic exhaustion of its rural production base, and the recursive politics of fear management through food.

Rice as Protest

The rhetorical power of the phrase “米騒動” (kome sōdō) derives from its association with the mass protests of 1918, during which speculative price surges in rice markets provoked nationwide unrest, rural-urban mobilizations, and the deployment of state violence. The fall of Prime Minister Terauchi Masatake’s government marked the episode as a rupture in the social contract regarding staple grain availability.

In contrast, the 2025 situation lacks the direct political antagonism or labor organizing of its antecedent. Yet, media framing has revived the analogy, mobilizing public memory of rice as an object of struggle and entitlement. This rhetorical move occludes historical distinctions while reinforcing rice’s status as a metonym for collective vulnerability.

It also performs a moral economy in which the state’s legitimacy remains tethered to its capacity to guarantee stable access to domestically grown rice. The 1918 precedent does not explain the current event’s material causes but structures its interpretive horizon, predisposing consumers and commentators alike to respond with anticipatory grievance and defensive procurement.

Structural Decline and the Post-Reduction Era

Japan’s contemporary rice production crisis is not a rupture but a culmination of slow-moving institutional change. The postwar 減反政策 (gentan seisaku)—a rice acreage reduction policy enacted in 1970—systematically disincentivized cultivation by paying farmers to leave paddies fallow. This program was partially reversed in 2018, yet its institutional legacy persists in the configuration of production incentives, regional crop rotation, and the administrative expectations of local cooperatives.

Many smallholders exited the sector during the gentan decades, converting land to other uses or ceasing cultivation altogether. By 2025, over 60 percent of Japanese farmers are aged 65 or older, and replacement rates among younger cohorts remain negligible. The result is a contraction of production capacity not simply in volume but in institutional resilience. Even modest supply shocks—drought, delayed planting, or fertilizer cost increases—now generate disproportionately large downstream effects. In this context, consumer perception of scarcity may result less from present availability than from recognition of a structurally diminished production system unlikely to recover.

Price, Platform, and Preparedness

The immediate emergence of the 令和の米騒動 (Reiwa no kome sōdō) must be traced to developments beginning in late 2024, when retail rice prices rose by 15–20 percent year-over-year due to weak harvests and reduced cultivation area. While these figures remain historically moderate, their timing coincided with a confluence of digital and geopolitical factors. Online influencers and disaster preparedness communities promoted rice hoarding in response to speculation about a Nankai Trough earthquake, anticipated within the next decade but periodically dramatized in public advisories.

Viral social media posts showed consumers stockpiling rice alongside water and fuel, often with nationalist framings of self-sufficiency and government unreliability. Mainstream outlets initially dismissed the panic, but by early 2025, prominent news programs adopted the language of shortage and crisis. These affective feedback loops—amplified by algorithmic exposure and episodic distribution disruptions—converted isolated behavior into mass response. The act of purchasing rice, once routine, acquired the symbolic status of anticipatory defense against systemic failure, thereby exacerbating the very shortage it was meant to forestall.

Panic as Process

The sociological structure of moral panic provides a useful heuristic for understanding the 2025 crisis. Sociologists Erich Goode and Nachman Ben-Yehuda argue that moral panics involve disproportionate social reactions to perceived threats, often involving exaggerated media portrayals, volatile public sentiment, and calls for urgent corrective action. In this case, the threat is not a sudden absence of rice but the gradual attenuation of a national infrastructure perceived as increasingly fragile. Rice panic indexes the social ontology of loss—not of commodity supply, but of institutional guarantees, intergenerational continuity, and agrarian intelligibility.

The empirical data from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries indicates no major disruption in overall rice availability. Yet consumer behavior has diverged from such indicators, shaped more by ambient anxiety and collective memory than by supply-and-demand equilibrium. The market functions as a stage for enacting the disjuncture between statistical sufficiency and experiential insecurity, in which rice purchases serve as ritual assertions of continuity in the face of structural decline.

Political Beneficiaries and Institutional Reactions

The political economy of the 2025 crisis extends beyond consumer behavior into the domains of policymaking, regional subsidy allocation, and ideological positioning. Large-scale distributors and emergency food providers have reported record profits from panic purchases. Prefectural governments in rural areas have petitioned for expanded cultivation subsidies and increased procurement quotas, leveraging the panic to redirect fiscal resources toward agricultural revitalization. Within national politics, right-leaning legislators have revived discourse on food self-sufficiency, proposing tariff protections and youth labor programs in agriculture.

The panic, thus, becomes a vector for institutional claims-making, in which actors interpret consumer fear as evidence of state failure or as justification for policy redirection. Notably, no comprehensive reform addressing the demographic basis of agricultural decline has emerged. Instead, the crisis has been absorbed into Japan’s broader pattern of symbolic politics, in which the performance of responsiveness substitutes for structural intervention. Rice serves less as a nutritional good than as an index of national coherence and administrative credibility.

Crisis, Identity, and Erasure

What distinguishes the 2025 Rice ‘Riot’ from past episodes of food insecurity is the symbolic overdetermination of rice as both commodity and identity. As consumption of bread and pasta surpasses rice among younger generations, the act of purchasing rice assumes a retrospective character—less about diet than about civilizational continuity. Panic buying expresses not merely fear of hunger but fear of disconnection from a historical identity premised on rice cultivation and household provision.

This nostalgia operates in tandem with neoliberal erosion, whereby the state’s logistical capacity remains technically intact, but its moral authority to guarantee staple stability appears increasingly in doubt. In this configuration, the rice crisis functions as a cipher for larger anxieties about decline, abandonment, and ontological displacement. Consumers do not merely fear being unable to buy rice; they fear what that inability would signify about the status of Japan’s social compact, its rural future, and its post-growth trajectory.

Crisis as Narrative Device

The invocation of “米騒動” (kome sōdō) in 2025 reveals the extent to which historical memory is mobilized not to clarify contemporary dynamics but to produce affective coherence in moments of uncertainty. The actual rice supply in 2025 remains adequate by historical standards, but the moral panic reveals the disjunction between logistical metrics and lived experience in a society structured by aging, depopulation, and economic precarity. Addressing such crises requires more than technocratic reassurance. It demands structural reform to stabilize agricultural production, renewed intergenerational transmission of farming knowledge, and media literacy interventions to moderate affective contagion. Above all, it requires resistance to the narrative temptation of crisis as explanation—a mode of storytelling that displaces accountability, obscures causality, and reproduces vulnerability in the guise of urgency. The ‘Reiwa Rice Riot’ is not a repetition of 1918. It is the managed spectacle of scarcity in an age of logistical abundance and social exhaustion.

References

Goode, E. and Ben-Yehuda, N., 2009. Moral Panics: The Social Construction of Deviance. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

JBpress, 2024. 「令和のコメ騒動」で備蓄米が放出されなかったワケ、100万トン維持に年500億円…安全保障のため石油やレアメタルも. JBpress. Available at: https://jbpress.ismedia.jp/articles/-/83209 [Accessed 20 May 2025].

JLuggage, 2024. 米不足・本当の理由. Japan Luggage Express. Available at: https://www.jluggage.com/blog/various/true-cause-for-rice-shortage/ [Accessed 1 May 2025].

Livedoor News, 2025. 《令和の米騒動》経済のプロが断言「政府にできることはない」米に続いて卵まで高騰で逼迫する家計. Livedoor News. Available at: https://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/28803962/ [Accessed 27 May 2025].

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), 2025. 米の流通状況等について. MAFF. Available at: https://www.maff.go.jp/j/syouan/keikaku/soukatu/r6_kome_ryutu.html [Accessed 27 May 2025].

Nikoniko Kitchen Takarazuka, 2025. 『米不足』本当の理由【2025】黒幕は誰だ？減反政策と流通の歪みを解明. Nikoniko Kitchen Takarazuka. Available at: https://nikonikokitchen-takarazuka.com/rice-shortage/ [Accessed 27 May 2025].

RM-Navi, 2024. お米の買いだめ“パニック購買”とその背後にある認知バイアスの罠～「内集団バイアス」とは. RM-Navi. Available at: https://rm-navi.com/search/item/2119 [Accessed 27 May 2025].

Shiomi, S., 2007. 米騒動：近代日本最大の民衆蜂起. Tokyo: Chūōkōron Shinsha.

The Times, 2025. Japan raids its emergency rice stocks amid anger over prices. The Times. Available at: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rice-price-japan-news-gfh3whw8n [Accessed 27 May 2025].

AP News, 2025. Emergency reserves, high prices, rationing. How did Japan’s rice crisis get this far? AP News. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/6e21bc9017c8f6d8c0a1f179e50e975f [Accessed 27 May 2025].

Reuters, 2025. Japan pledges immediate rice relief for consumers to prevent shift to foreign brands. Reuters. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/world/japan-minister-wants-rice-shelves-under-3000-yen-jiji-reports-2025-05-23/ [Accessed 27 May 2025].

The Guardian, 2025. Rice crisis: Japan imports grain from South Korea for first time in more than 25 years. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/22/japan-south-korea-rice-import-crisis [Accessed 20 May 2025].

The Washington Post, 2025. Soaring prices, empty shelves as Japan’s rice crisis worsens. The Washington Post. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/04/26/japan-rice-shortage-imports/ [Accessed 3 May 2025].

Financial Times, 2024. Japan faces worst rice shortage in decades. Financial Times. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/4a0ea012-1bcb-4944-8201-a45438d94083 [Accessed 27 May 2025].

1. Reiwa (令和) is the current era in the Japanese calendar system, which began on May 1, 2019, following the abdication of Emperor Akihito and the ascension of his son, Emperor Naruhito. In contemporary usage, “Reiwa” is often used to demarcate current events or policies (e.g., “Reiwa policies,” “Reiwa generation”) and functions as a temporal and ideological marker of the present political and cultural moment in Japan.