| 研究実績の概要 |
Data collection and analyses: 1) Generating various party and party system nationalization indicators (party coverage, static, dynamic, and multilevel) for Japan, UK, Canada, Belgium and Sweden and analyzing them with the extent of their partisan strongholds. 2) Comparing electoral strategies of candidates in rural, urban, and “denationalizing” regions (e.g. Okinawa and Osaka) in Japan. 3) Interview with opposition party branches in LDP strongholds (e.g. Fukui and Ehime)
Output: 1) Identity politics and denationalization of elections in Okinawa. 2) Three working papers analyzing: a) strongholds and party system nationalization before and after electoral reform in Japan; b) cross-national comparison of extent and strength of partisan strongholds; c) candidate strategies of “nationalizing” and “localizing” manifestos in different regions
Findings:Japanese parties have not become more nationalized and LDP strongholds have become more entrenched in rural areas post-electoral reform; Comparatively, Japan’s nationalization levels are as low as fully majoritarian (UK) or highly federalized states (Canada); The lopsided competition is particularly stark in Japan as only one of two parties has a durable geographic base, unlike in other majoritarian states; Japan’s “unbalanced” nationalization and entrenched strongholds result from a combination of electoral rules at national level which fragments the opposition, historical legacy (a network of local assembly members in SNTV era), and multilevel depth (continued dominance of LDP in local elections) which advantages the LDP
|
