| Project/Area Number |
23730154
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Research Field |
Politics
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Yokohama National University (2014)
Ritsumeikan University (2011-2013) |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
KATO Masatoshi 横浜国立大学, 国際社会科学研究院, 准教授 (10543514)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2011-04-28 – 2015-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2014)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,340,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥540,000)
Fiscal Year 2013: ¥650,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000、Indirect Cost: ¥150,000)
Fiscal Year 2012: ¥780,000 (Direct Cost: ¥600,000、Indirect Cost: ¥180,000)
Fiscal Year 2011: ¥910,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000、Indirect Cost: ¥210,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | 福祉国家再編 / 日豪比較 / 比較政治経済学 / 比較福祉国家論 / 政治学におけるアイディアアプローチ / 雇用保障を通じた社会的保護 / 再商品化（の多様性） / 政治学におけるメタ理論 / 政治学的分析ための理論枠組み / 社会統合の変遷 / 現代国家の変容 / アイディアアプローチ / 政治学的分析のための理論枠組 / 社会政策と移民政策の変容 / 比較政治理論 / オーストラリア / 日本 / 社会政策 / 移民・入国管理政策 / 言説の政治 / 雇用保障重視型の福祉国家 / 自由主義化 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
In this study, I analyze the feature of welfare state reform in Japan and Australia. Both countries provided people with social protection through employment policy in the postwar era. But, globalization and post-industrialization had big impact on them.
Both countries focused on re-commercialization aiming at social inclusion of the socially excluded and de-familiarization aiming at mitigation of family welfare. In Australia, the ALP government in 1980's and 90's adopted activation policy and women friendly policy. Thereafter, coalition government in 90's and 00's used workfare policy and family policy which gave traditional family some favorable treatments. In Japan, government has adopted workfare policy since 90's. While they introduced public nursing-care insurance system and so on, the backlash was emerging. These differences were caused by the interaction between the political actor's partisanship, political institutions, and the difference of ideas which actors held.
|
