Handbook of Global Political Policy

Stuart Nagel

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781000643565
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Politica e relazioni internazionali
• Categoría: Politica

The latest in the six-volume set of global policy handbooks, this reference utilizes a cross-national, cross-policy approach to examine the public policy of six different regions around the world. Combining actual and theoretical perspectives, the book compares and presents nonideological resolutions to current political conditions worldwide. With contributions from over 30 international policy experts and academicians and containing over 1200 literature references, tables, and drawings, the book is an insightful resource for public administrators and public policy experts, political scientists, economists, sociologists, attorneys, and students in these disciplines.

10 New Dimensions in Administrative Reform in Japan

DOI: 10.4324/9780429272004-10

Katsuaki Yamazaki Kitakyushu University, Kitakyushu, Japan

I. INTRODUCTION

Japan is now under “revolutionary” change. The main factors which bring about this change are: a rapid development of information communication technology; globalization; liberalization of the economy; an increase in the number of elderly people and a decrease in the younger population; and the huge fiscal deficits of the national government.

These factors have the momentum required for the total reform of the social, economic, political, and governmental systems which have been developed and nurtured for a century since the Meiji era.

Focusing on the governmental reforms, several important measures have been taken. For instance, the Administrative Procedures Law was enacted in 1993 which aimed at making public administration transparent to the public. And in 1995 the Promotion of Decentralization Law was enacted, based on which the Committee for Promotion of Decentralization was established and has been working to make plans and programs for the promotion of decentralization and recommend actions to the Prime Minister. Under the second Hashimoto government, the Administrative Reform Council worked under the chairpersonship of the Prime Minister to discuss streamlining plans of national government.

We have experienced national administrative reform movements two times since the end of World War II. They were mainly asked for and led by the business community seeking efficiency and economy of governmental administration.

We are experiencing in the 1990s a somewhat different kind of reform movement from the former ones. The characteristics are as follows: (1) the movement is supported not only by the business world but also by the ordinary citizens groups; and (2) administrative reform is but one aspect of a total reform movement of social, economic, political, and governmental systems.

Following an introduction to the background of the reform movement, I will present the measures of administrative reforms which are now under implead mentation, the reports released, and the plans currently under discussion.

II. NEW ERA OF REFORMISM?

A. Administrative Reform a Priority of the Hashimoto Government

In the general election held in October 1996, all major parties in Japan used “administrative reform” as their main campaign slogan. And Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto reiterated his determination to carry out fundamental reform of the administrative system by 2001 as the top priority for his new government.

Hashimoto said that his government was dedicated to "reform and reconstruction” of the socioeconomic system as a whole, specifying the five big reforms—administrative reform, fiscal reform, economic structural reform, monetary system reform, and social welfare reform—which must be carried out simultaneously in a comprehensive manner, but the administrative reform was the most urgent one. For example, at a news conference held on the day after forming his new Cabinet, Mr. Hashimoto said:

The socioeconomic system that has supported Japan for the 50 years since the war has exposed its limitations.... To rebuild a new system suited to the 21st century, we have to carry out reform of Kasumigaseki (the Tokyo district that is home to the nation’s bureaucracy).... [Such reform] requires strong political determination.... I will draw up the blue-print myself to tackle reform (1).

About 10 days after his designation by the Diet to the position of Prime Minister, he established a special committee with approval of the Cabinet. The name of this panel was the Administrative Reform Council which was under the direct control of the Prime Minister and made up of 12 leading figures from the nation’s private sector with no bureaucrats or ex-bureaucrats participating.

The Administrative Reform Council completed a plan to streamline the administration by November of 1997. Then the government submitted bills concerning the reform to a 1999 Diet session with the goal of achieving reform by 2001.

B. Reasons for Administrative Reform Movement in the 1990s

1. Administrative Reforms Before the 1990s

We have experienced national administrative reform movements twice since the end of World War II. The first was held in the early 1960s and the second was in the 1980s. They were mainly initiated and led by the business community seeking efficiency and economy of governmental administration.

In 1968, the Sato Government established the “scrap-and-build” principle of structural reform of the central government, and in the next year, the "overall full number law,” establishing a personnel ceiling for nonfield personnel of the central ministries and agencies as a whole, was enacted. Since then the personnel management system and the scrap-and-build system of organizational management have been strictly enforced in the annual inquiry of organization and personnel by the Administrative Management Bureau of the Management and Coordination Agency during the course of the fiscal year (2).

The main results of the second national administrative reform movement which began after the second oil crisis were privatization of three public corporations. These included the Japan National Railway and the Japan Telegraph and Telephone, and the establishment of the Management and Coordination Agency by the reorganization and consolidation of existing administrative organizations including the Administrative Management Agency (3).

2. New Dimensions Requiring Administrative Reform in the 1990s

We are experiencing in the 1990s a somewhat different kind of reform movement from those before. There are several reasons behind the present movement. But fundamentally speaking, we should see this phenomenon in the context of world history. Nation-states founded in the 19th century are now finding it necessary to reconsider the basis on which they were established in light of the great storm of modern globalization, as I will explain below.

(a) Fiscal Crisis. As the economy bubbled in late 1980s and burst in early 1990s, a mountain of financial wreckage was left not only in the private sector but also in the public sector. The Finance Ministry calculated that the outstanding balance of government bonds would reach to ¥240 trillion by the end of March 1997. Together with the debts of local governments and other liabilities, the country was saddled with over ¥440 trillion in debts. This economic reality forced Prime Minister Hashimoto to launch a broad campaign to overhaul Japan’s governmental and economic system.

(b) New Civic Activism Toward Bureaucratic Corruption. The precise reason all parties gave high priority to administrative reform in the last election campaign in Japan was a series of scandals of high-ranking bureaucrats. After the land speculation-driven economic bubble came to an end, the scandalous irregularities of the political, business, and bureaucratic worlds have been exposed one after another.

One result of the corruption was the collapse of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) government after 38 years of uninterrupted single-party rule. In the heat of popular movement pushing for total reform of the governmental system, the general election of 1993 took place. Then the LDP was defeated, and Mr. Hosokawa’s coalition government was organized.

The collapse of the LDP’s rule made the power structure considerably transparent. As a consequence, the widespread public debate took place over the legitimacy of a politically powerful bureaucracy. So the top agenda of new government was, as a matter of course, political and administrative reform. Since then the reforms have been one of the highest priorities of successive governments in Japan.

Another result was an aggressive civic activism against bureaucratic corruption—especially in 1996, the year of a general election. Earlier that year scandals of top-ranking officials in the Ministry of Finance and that of Health and Welfare caused public respect for bureaucrats to nosedive. The bribing of politicians by those in business frequently occurred after the war, but it was the first time that, as one high-ranking career bureaucrat after another had been suspected of questionable conduct, the situation was met with an aggressive and angry response from the public. Thus there arose unprecedented investigations by citizens groups called “citizens’ ombudsmen” to disclose a tor...