1988 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Comparative Analysis of Government-Industry Relations as a Prerequisite for Policy-Formation.
| Project/Area Number |
61300001
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Co-operative Research (A)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Research Field |
広領域
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Saitama University (1988)
Hokkaido University (1986-1987) |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
ITO Daiichi Graduate School of Policy Science, Saitama University, Professor, 大学院政策科学研究科, 教授 (30000657)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
YOSHIMURA Toru Graduate School of Policy Science, Saitama University, Professor, 大学院政策科学研究科, 教授 (50008629)
TANAKA Masami Graduate School of Policy Science, Saitama University, Professor, 大学院政策科学研究科, 教授 (40197471)
MORITA Akira Faculty of Law and Economics, Chiba University, Associate Professor, 法経学部, 助教授 (80134344)
MURAMATSU Michio Faculty of Law, Kyoto University, Professor, 法学部, 教授 (80025147)
NOGUCHI Yukio Faculty of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, Professor, 経済学部, 教授 (90008649)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
1986 – 1988
|
| Keywords | Regulation / Privatisation / Telecommunication / Biotechnology / Diversification / Liberalisation of Financial Market / Research and Development / 政策コミュニティ |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
Starting with the framework of "policy community", this project aims at analysing the structure and working of government-industry relations both in the growing sectors and in the declining sectors, with a view to refining the original framework further on. The products of analysis suggest that, in Japan, greater stress is placed upon encouraging private firms to be self-sustaining than in britain, as is exemplified by policies urging those in the declining sectors to diversify business activities by themselves ot those in the growing sectors to conduct R ＆ D on their own initiative. This implies that, contrary to the stereotyped notion of the "government-led" economy, role of the government in industrial development is little more than that of a trump card that can be played only in exceptional instances. There is, however, some evidence which indicates that a fixed quantity of regulation must somehow be secured in every country and that, while regulation of a guild-type is available in Britain, most of it must be provided in the form of government regulation in Japan. This latter point may be illustrated by the fact the practices of M ＆ A serve as functional substitute for entry regulation in Britain. Thus, seen as s whole, "policy community" may usefully be reconstructed as a dual framework of analysis involving a well-organised "administrative community" that allows government intervention to work as a trump card And a "legal community" of a rule-setting type that envelops an administrative community. and a key to effective provlem-solving seems to lie in selecting a pattern of interactions between them that suits best to the nature of policy areas in question.
|
