著者
宮澤 健一
出版者
The Japan Academy
雑誌
日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.60, no.2, pp.87-115, 2006 (Released:2007-06-22)

With Japan's quicker-than-expected declining birth rate and aging population, the scale of activities in its medical, care and welfare sectors exceeds those of education and research, which are also components of Japan's public domain. This is bringing new issues into questions, including policy-related ones. In providing answers, it will be necessary to investigate the state of the medical, care and welfare sectors, while also taking a look from a wider perspective at the influence and function of these sectors as they interact within the wider economy and society. In elucidating this situation, I use as a tool input-output, or inter-industry, analysis, while attempting to widen its scope.
著者
塩野 宏
出版者
日本学士院
雑誌
日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.63, no.1, pp.1-33, 2008
被引用文献数
1
著者
樋口 陽一
出版者
日本学士院
雑誌
日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.71, no.1, pp.17, 2016 (Released:2017-01-20)

Préliminaire――pourquoi eux deux ? 1. Schmitt et Capitant en tant que contemporains 2. Schmitt et Capitant, pour l’itinéraire intellectuel de l’auteur de l’article Ⅰ.Pouvoir constituant = volontarisme 1. Capitant et Schmitt:une lecture partagée sur Thomas Hobbes 2. 《die liberale Rezeption》 de Schmitt ? Ⅱ.Pouvoir constituant = décisionnisme (1):le contraste de manières dont le pouvoir constituant s’exerce 1. Décision chez Schmitt;exceptionnalité 2. Décision chez Capitant:quotidienneté Ⅲ.Pouvoir constituant = décisionisme (2):le contraste de valeurs poursuivies 1. Capitant:《l’individu》 2. Schmitt:《Volk》 ? 《inhaltliche Indifferenz》 ? En guise de conclusion――les carrières vécues à l’opposé l’une et l’autre
著者
宮澤 健一
出版者
日本学士院
雑誌
日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.56, no.1, pp.13-37, 2001 (Released:2007-06-22)

Will it be possible to achieve a convergence of agreement on social order? How can“efficiency”and“fairness”in the paradigm for evaluating system operation be harmonized and coordinated? These questions are explored on both the logical level of principle and the actual level of reality. By juxtaposing the two, the distance between principle and reality is sought and the meaning of that distance considered.
著者
伊藤 誠
出版者
日本学士院
雑誌
日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.65, no.2, pp.109-135, 2011-01
著者
塩野 宏
出版者
The Japan Academy
雑誌
日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.60, no.2, pp.67-85, 2006 (Released:2007-06-22)

National universities in Japan, since their establishment under the Meiji Constitution, have been defined as administrative organs of the Ministry of Education or the Ministry of Education and Science. However, the National University Corporations Law of 2002 changed that structure. Effective April 2004, all national universities have been recharacterized as National University Corporations.
著者
山田 雄三
出版者
日本学士院
雑誌
日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.39, no.3, pp.205-218, 1984 (Released:2007-06-22)

Economics has been titled“Political Economy”for a long time since the Classical School. The word economy is etymologically related to oikos (house), so in order to tell social economy, an adjective“political”(that is“social”in Greek origin) must be attached to economy. At the same time, “Political Economy”had another meaning, implicating“the science of a statesman”as Adam Smith called it, although no clear distinctions between policy and theory were observed.Alfred Marshall used“Economics”in place of Political Economy. He dealt with laws of causality in economic facts, but did not admit to give valuations for them. Even in his work on economic welfare, the thesis was to inquire into the causes of welfare (or wealth) in society, putting welfare as an objective of valuations aside.Nowadays, we find that“Political Economy”is adopted as a political science or a policy science, by some heterodox economists, especially those of Neoinstitutionalism. Among others, Gunnar Myrdal deserves to be paid attention in the methodological point of view. In his opinion, any economic thinking could not be neutral in regard to political situation, left or right. Then he asserts that it is required for a policy science to set value premises as hypotheses, not value judgements themselves, and to examine the relevance of them to the reality. The recent“Political Economy”, it seems to me, may be a way to tear off the mask of neutrality in economic thinking and to find, if any, common ground of knowledge for conflicting opinions.