According to a study, people in Japan may all share the same surname in roughly 500 years. Hiroshi Yoshida, a professor of economics at Tohoku University, led the research as part of a drive to update the civil code, which has been in existence since the 1800s. According to the research, unless married couples are allowed to use different surnames, the whole Japanese population may adopt the surname Sato-san by 2531. Japanese couples must currently share the same family name.
The study, based on various assumptions, sought to highlight the current system’s impact on Japanese society.
“If everyone becomes Sato, we may have to be addressed by our first names or by numbers,” the professor said, according to the Japanese publication Mainichi. “I don’t think that would be a good world to live in.”
Sato is currently Japan’s most prevalent surname. It accounts for 1.5% of the 125.1 million-strong population. The second is Suzuki.
Since the paper was published on April 1, some people believe it is a joke. However, Yoshida urges people to take the situation seriously. According to him, if everyone shared the same surname, it would be difficult to distinguish between them. The professor described it as “not only inconvenient but also [undermining] individual dignity.”
Aside from the practical issues, losing different surnames would result in a loss of cultural, regional, and family legacy.
If Satos continues to grow at this rate, it will account for over half of the Japanese population by 2446
The fraction of Satos increased by 1.0083 between 2022 and 2023. If Satos continues to grow at this rate, it will account for over half of the Japanese population by 2446, reaching 100% by 2531.
In Japan, the lady must change her last name in 95% of weddings. However, it is not specified under current law. However, an increasing number of people support married couples with different surnames.
Japan compels spouses to share the same family name. However, the government has permitted maiden names to appear alongside married names on passports, driver’s licenses, and residence records.
The ruling Liberal Democratic Party has provided the primary argument against the issue. They argue that modifying the law will weaken family unity and generate confusion among youngsters.