著者

五野井 郁夫

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.85, pp.5-22, 2018-03-31

---

This paper focuses on presenting and analyzing some of the most importanttheological models of participatory democracy, deliberative democracy and liquiddemocracy to emphasize their possibilities and limits. Each of these democratictheories are located between democratic bipolar models‒representativedemocracy and direct democracy‒ and have explicit commitment to reconsiderexisting models of representative democracy. Liquid Democracy is bothdemocratic political idea and the open source political voting platform createdand practiced by the Swedish and German Pirate Parties as a way to create ascalable and delegate democratic political party in the era of development of theinformation society and social network. Recently this idea has partly been appliedby the working groups of Bundestag (German federal parliament). This papershows how these three models of democracies can be embedded into theframework of existing democratic bipolar models by attempting to providetheoretical foundations of “mixed government” in democratic theories.

著者

五野井 郁夫

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.85, pp.5-22, 2018-03-31

---

This paper focuses on presenting and analyzing some of the most importanttheological models of participatory democracy, deliberative democracy and liquiddemocracy to emphasize their possibilities and limits. Each of these democratictheories are located between democratic bipolar models‒representativedemocracy and direct democracy‒ and have explicit commitment to reconsiderexisting models of representative democracy. Liquid Democracy is bothdemocratic political idea and the open source political voting platform createdand practiced by the Swedish and German Pirate Parties as a way to create ascalable and delegate democratic political party in the era of development of theinformation society and social network. Recently this idea has partly been appliedby the working groups of Bundestag (German federal parliament). This papershows how these three models of democracies can be embedded into theframework of existing democratic bipolar models by attempting to providetheoretical foundations of "mixed government" in democratic theories.

著者

萩原 優騎

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.82, pp.25-45, 2016-09-30

---

Resilience became a keyword to consider the situation after the GreatEast Japan Earthquake. However, defining resilience is not easy because of thevariety of its definitions. Therefore it is necessary to compare the definitionin one field with that in the other. It will be impossible to gain a deeperunderstanding of necessary conditions of resilience without such a review. Thepurpose of this paper is to form the foundation to design a resilient communitywith this kind of method mainly based on the views of sociology.One of the most famous definitions of resilience is the one by C. S.Holling. He tried to define resilience by comparing it with stability. Stabilityis the ability of a system to return to an equilibrium state after a temporarydisturbance. On the other hand, resilience is the ability of a system to absorbchange and disturbance and still maintain the same relationships betweenpopulations or state variables. According to Andrew Zolli and Ann MarieHealy, many definitions of resilience rest on one of two essential aspects:continuity and recovery in the face of change. They defined resilience as thecapacity of a system to maintain its core purpose and integrity in the face ofdramatically changed circumstances.Defining community is also indispensable. Junichi Saito definedcommunity as intermediate groups between individuals and nations.Community tended to be evaluated negatively because of its exclusivity andhomogeneity. However, today it means various relationships among peoplethrough the process of collaboration to rebuild their life. The other characterof the contemporary community is it is under the influence of globalization.There are many problems beyond the boundaries such as global environmentalproblems. Making much of plurality and individuality is important because thediscussion without going into specifics will not be useful to solve the problemsin each area. Besides, it is also necessary to consider how to connect theindividual efforts with one another to tackle global issues.However, such kind of efforts has some problems. Efforts of people maybe convenient for the government to reduce costs of their control. As a result,people will function as subcontractors of the government without knowingit. Another problem is the static views of people. They may think the presentsituation is self-evident. They do not assume the situation can change becauseof the lack of critical thinking. It is essential for them to be aware how thepresent situation has been formed to reconsider the actual state. The otherproblem is the difficulty of communication between the experts and the lay.The role of a transitional leader to mediate specialized knowledge of theexperts and local knowledge of the lay will be important to achieve a betterdecision-making.Considering these points is a necessary condition to design a resilientcommunity. They will be presented by the researchers who take part in adecision-making process to support to improve the situation. Moreover, it isalso important to be aware the participation of researchers itself may affect adecision-making process, as Niklas Luhmann pointed out.

著者

西尾 隆

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.79, pp.143-162, 2015-03-31

---

Modern governments have shifted their major functions from coercion to service delivery. Even in such a coercive policy field as correction administration, where the security issue is still a top priority, the style of prison management is changing towards a softer and more responsive system in accordance with new demands from inmates, who are aging, more multicultural and diverse. Having reviewed the characteristics of Japan’s prison management in a comparative perspective, this paper will focus on the recent changes in the correction administration system, with special focus on human resource management and the introduction of the PFI institutions.Historically, Japan’s postwar prison management had been decentralized and flexible, while not well-standardized, but since around 1970 a tightly-controlled prison management system was institutionalized across the country. However, the government started reforming this system’s, legal and practical components, when injuries and fatalities occurred at Nagoya Prison in 2002. In order to put more emphasis on rehabilitation and to mitigate overcrowding, four PFI prisons were established from 2007 to 2008, where prison guards as public servants andstaff of private companies are collaborating in rehabilitation and occupation training of the inmates. Although it is still at an experimental stage, this new style of correction administration seems to replace the traditionally “tight-controlˮ system.When one observes the reality of inmates comparing with patients or handicapped people outside the prison walls, it is becoming harder and harder to draw a clear line between prisons and welfare or medical institutions. While the PFI prisons were introduced to meet the urgent, short-term needs, the reform can have a longer-term impact on the shift of nature of correction administration from a simple coercion for inside safety to a mixture of services including education, training, and welfare for inmates, as well as security for people at large.

著者

田中 極子

出版者

国際基督教大学 International Christian University

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.89, pp.139-164, 2022-03-31

---

The new coronavirus (COVID-19), which caused a global pandemic in 2020, continues to be disputed over its source, whether it is a natural outbreak or a laboratory spill.It is not an easy task to determine the source of an infectious disease outbreak: whether it is a natural outbreak, an accidental spill from a laboratory, or a deliberate criminal act. It is because of the characteristics of biological agents (infectious agents such as bacteria, pathogenic microorganisms and toxins of biological origin, or viruses) that can be used in small amounts in culture, which makes them easy to conceal, and by the fact that they have an incubation period before the onset of illness, which makes it difficult to track down the cause. Nonetheless, infectious disease outbreaks, once they occur regardless of the source, have a direct impact on people's lives and human health, cause socioeconomic panic and the scale of the damage is immeasurable.In addition, just as the response to COVID-19 caused confusion, the capability to contain the spread and mitigate damage after an outbreak occurs are limited. It is, therefore, an urgent task to build a national and global state of preparedness to control infectious disease, considering it as a non-traditional security agenda. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 is an attempt by the Security Council to tackle biological threats from an international security perspective. It was adopted in 2004 to prevent the proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and their means of delivery to non-state 164 actors. One of the main obligations to all UN Member States is to adopt and implement appropriate national control measures to prevent the proliferation of related materials used to develop, produce or use for these weapons. According to the review of the national implementation of theresolution 1540, however, only half of the 193 UN member states have taken any measures on biosecurity, and there is a wide gap in the content of these measures.This issue may be due to the fact that there is no common understanding of "biosecurity" either within each country or internationally. This paper provides an overall picture of the biosecurity control by UN member states against current biological threats and identifies its challenges and prospects. The paper first illustrates an overview of the diversification of biological threats and depicts what “biosecurity” concepts are being developed accordingly. Four types of biological threats are described, namely, biological terrorism, global infectious disease pandemic, dual use research of concern and environmental risks in biodiversity. It then shows that different nations have different policy priorities for biological threats and that different “biosecurity” concepts are used based on such priorities through the review of national implementation of resolution 1540. The paper shows that many countries that have some national control measures for biological agents have secured such obligations under either infection control or environmental protection legal systems. The paper suggests that in order to establish a nationwidepreparedness system in the presence of different biological threats, countries need to have a standardized concept of "biosecurity" among policy domains and to view it as a public policy issue comprising all aspects of public health, security, economic, fiscal, as well as science and technology. To this end, the paper finally concludes that to effectively bridge the gap between different policy areas, establishing a forum for continuous information sharing is necessary.

著者

萩原 優騎

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.85, pp.23-43, 2018-03-31

---

It is difficult to share values and aims in the contemporary society, which is abackground of the difficulties of consensus building. The purpose of this paper isto consider the location of problems concerning the difficulties by referring toprevious researches on risks. Theories of Ulrich Beck, Slavoj Žižek and NiklasLuhmann will mainly be focused on.Beck is well known to his theory of risk society. He says that expert knowledgeis necessary to recognize risks in the contemporary situation, which is a result ofthe radicalization of modernity. A main character of a risk society is uncertainty.For example, not only the lay but also experts cannot predict the effects of theproblems caused by science and technology such as environmental problems.People share anxiety and seek safety, but it will not motivate them to change thesituation because their main interest is to avoid the worst. Moreover, the more thesituation becomes serious, the more they will be faced with what they do notknow. In spite of this paradoxical matter, they have to make a decision to avoidthe worst.Žižek's thought is based on Lacanian psychoanalysis. He tries to explainwhere the problems are in a risk society from the view of the structure of thepsychoanalytic subject. The imaginary is stable as long as the symbolic orderworks well. However, this function tends to become unstable in the contemporarysituation. Traditional values and ethics are not self-evident today because of therapid development of science and technology. Ethics committees are organized every time problems occur, but they cannot recover the obviousness of socialvalues. The disintegration of the symbolic order is a result of the radicalization ofreflexivity. The obviousness relies on non-reflexive acceptance of the symbolicinstitution.Luhmann distinguishes risks from dangers. Risks are the losses which arerecognized as the results of decisions, and dangers are the ones which arerecognized as what are provided from the outside. There is a gulf between risksand dangers, in other words, between the decision makers and those affected. Forexample, the decision makers may communicate with those affected. Even if theysucceed in building a consensus as a result of this communication, the structure ofthe conflicts among them itself continues to exist in the concerned society. It isusually said that communication, participation, ethics, and so on are importantelements when they try to build a consensus, but none of them can bridge the gap.Obviously these three theories have different premises and major concerns,though all of them try to analyze the problems of consensus building. It will bedifficult to bridge among them, but comparing their premises and major concernsis significant. Their characters and efficiency are clarified to some degree throughthis research. Knowing characters and efficiency of some theories is necessary inapproaching complex problems in the contemporary risk society, becauseexamining the various aspects is a key to grasp the entire image even if it may betentative.

著者

寺田 麻佑

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.86, pp.89-109, 2019-03-31

---

本稿は、従わなければならないのは人である統治者の決める法なのか、古来、慣習として信じられ、存在が認められてきた、神々の法としての法なのかという問題について、アンチゴーヌをどのように読み解くのかという問題から、神の法・人の法について考察をおこなうものである。 アンチゴーヌは、神々の掟(法)に基づき、国王が定めた国(人)の法に抵抗した。これは、国という権力、国王という権力に対抗した、ということができるかもしれない。 アンチゴーヌはこう語る。「法がどこからくるか、知っている人はいない。法は永久に続くもの。」 古代や中世との比較において現代社会の法をみるとき、その特色は、個人の尊厳と個人の尊重を中核とし、基本的人権の制度的保障体系が憲法や法律のなかに確立され、整備されていることだということである。 しかし、法は、だれが、どのように作ることができるのかということに関する答えはない。法律の内容は(とくに間接民主制を採用する社会においては)議会の「公開の」審議を通して討議されて確定されるべきであるが、現実の法制定過程をみてみると、審議は行われず、あらかじめ定められた、もしくは予定された通りに国会を通過していくものも多い。 また、法が社会状況に追いつかない問題も常に生じる。法と社会のずれの問題は、どの社会においても起こるが、日本においてもそうである。このような法と社会のずれの問題は、何を「法」と考えるのかという問題とつながっている。 そこで、本稿は、アンチゴーヌを主題としてそこから現れる神の法・人の法の相違について検討を加えたうえで、現代社会の法と社会、人の法と神の法の問題をアンチゴーヌがどのように解釈しているのかということを通して考察を行う。

著者

萩原 優騎

出版者

国際基督教大学 International Christian University

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.89, pp.165-185, 2022-03-31

---

“LCS: Less Conflictual Solutions” is a methodology of “functional tolerance” theory proposed by Yoichiro Murakami. Takeaki Komatsu regards the concept of “tolerance” defined by Murakami as the one which shows a necessary condition for information senders to understand the context of their communication with information receivers or to build a new context they will be able to share. This definition appears when Komatsu criticizes the premises of risk communication. This paper aims to reconsider LCS and functional tolerance theory by analyzing Komatsu’s argument based on Niklas Luhmann’s sociology. According to Komatsu, one of the main interests of risk communication is how to convince information receivers. It means that the success of risk communication for information senders is to gain information receivers’ trust in their risk management. However, such an assumption is not self-evident if referred to Luhmann’s comments on risk communication. He distinguishes risks from dangers. Risks belong to the decision-makers, and dangers belong to those affected. In other words, risks are the losses recognized as the results of a decision, and dangers are the ones recognized as what are provided from the outside. There is a gulf between the decision-makers and those affected. What Luhmann pointed out is important to reexamine LCS. Murakami says that it is impossible to achieve the unique solution as the least-conflictual one. Therefore, making a compromise is necessary to reach a less conflictual solution. However, LCS cannot be a methodology to overcome a gulf between the decision-makers and those affected. On the other hand, Murakami emphasizes the importance of seeking a possibility to find a better solution, not the best one. If a person places absolute trust in the option selected already, he/she will lose sight of the possibility of choosing a better solution. He/she should be conscious that their present choice is tentative. Murakami regards that such a person is functionally tolerant. Being functionally tolerant is necessary to improve a situation by recognizing a gulf between the decision-makers and those affected, though it will not be resolved completely. In this meaning, Komatsu’s definition of Murakami’s “tolerance” is incorrect. Komatsu’s criticism against risk communication can be applied to LCS, but not to functional tolerance theory itself. However, this does not mean that functional tolerance theory should be accepted uncritically. It will be possible to revise LCS and functional tolerance theory by referring to Luhmann’s view.

著者

寺田 麻佑

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.86, pp.89-109, 2019-03-31

---

本稿は、従わなければならないのは人である統治者の決める法なのか、古来、慣習として信じられ、存在が認められてきた、神々の法としての法なのかという問題について、アンチゴーヌをどのように読み解くのかという問題から、神の法・人の法について考察をおこなうものである。 アンチゴーヌは、神々の掟(法)に基づき、国王が定めた国(人)の法に抵抗した。これは、国という権力、国王という権力に対抗した、ということができるかもしれない。 アンチゴーヌはこう語る。「法がどこからくるか、知っている人はいない。法は永久に続くもの。」 古代や中世との比較において現代社会の法をみるとき、その特色は、個人の尊厳と個人の尊重を中核とし、基本的人権の制度的保障体系が憲法や法律のなかに確立され、整備されていることだということである。 しかし、法は、だれが、どのように作ることができるのかということに関する答えはない。法律の内容は(とくに間接民主制を採用する社会においては)議会の「公開の」審議を通して討議されて確定されるべきであるが、現実の法制定過程をみてみると、審議は行われず、あらかじめ定められた、もしくは予定された通りに国会を通過していくものも多い。 また、法が社会状況に追いつかない問題も常に生じる。法と社会のずれの問題は、どの社会においても起こるが、日本においてもそうである。このような法と社会のずれの問題は、何を「法」と考えるのかという問題とつながっている。 そこで、本稿は、アンチゴーヌを主題としてそこから現れる神の法・人の法の相違について検討を加えたうえで、現代社会の法と社会、人の法と神の法の問題をアンチゴーヌがどのように解釈しているのかということを通して考察を行う。

著者

名嘉 憲夫

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.87, pp.27-48, 2020-03-31

---

Recently, books such as How Democracies Die suggested that even countries with formal democratic institutions experience decay or disfunction in their democratic processes. Recent Japanese political incidents appeared to confirm such observation. The "forced passage of the collective defense bill" of 2015 is one of the most controversial issues in recent Japan. Although many scholars specialized in constitution studies asserted that the collective defense bill was unconstitutional, the governing party forced the approval of the bill in the national Diet. The purposes of this paper are threefold. Firstly, the processes of passing the collective defense bill will be examined. Secondly, illegal political processes such as revolution and coup d'état, and the approval of the collective defense bill will be compared. Thirdly, the ideal types of illegal political process will be constructed. In order to analyze and understand the processes of the approval of the collective defense bill, concepts (and terms) such as "maneuver coup" and "legal coup" as an ideal type of hypothetical terms will be suggested. The appropriateness of concepts (and terms) such as "maneuver coup" and "legal coup" need to be further examined by positive case study research.

著者

安野 花凜 稲葉 祐之

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.87, pp.67-90, 2020-03-31

---

For many years, Japanese companies have been engaging in what can be referred to as “a closed innovation” policy, that is, they seek to create innovation within the boundaries of their own corporations. However, due to the impact of IT technology and globalization, it has become harder to create innovation within a closed community. Accordingly, this difficulty stresses the importance of seeking different approaches such as open innovation whereby large organizations collaborate with venture companies to attract people's attention. This paper focuses on corporate venture capital (CVC), which is one of the means of creating open innovation that has been attracting attention in recent years. The cosmetics industry is one of the sectors engaging in open innovation for new value creation. As the industry matures, new players with innovative technologies emerge, which intensifies competition. Collaboration with external organizations is necessary to achieve growth under such circumstances. However, there is no research on this CVC investment model, although it could be considered an effective method for the cosmetics industry to promote open innovation and restructure R&D strategy for sustainable growth. Therefore, this paper addresses the current investment model of the cosmetics industries focusing on the importance of transforming closed R&D into open R&D and on whether this approach is an effective method to attain sustainable growth. This research conducted multiple case studies on Shiseido, and POLA ORBIS Holdings, as these are two examples of cosmetic companies currently working based on a CVC investment approach. As a result, this research proposes three conceptualized CVC investment models: 1) R&D enhancedtyped CVC, 2) human resource development enhanced-typed CVC, and 3) corporate value improvement-typed CVC. Finally, there is also an analysis of the effectiveness of each of these models.

著者

寺田 麻佑

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.82, pp.47-71, 2016-09-30

---

Privatization generally means the transfer of ownership or business fromthe governmental organization to the private company and there are manymethods to exercise ‘privatization’.We have to think carefully and deeply on the methods of privatizationalong with the risk and the ways of responsibility that the government andlocal governments should take. It is because methods of privatization are thekey to think of the ways, fields and frameworks of providing services by thecentral and local governments.This paper takes up airport privatization among many fields whereprivatization becomes an issue. After looking at several countries’ privatizationsituations of airports from a viewpoint of legal system (mainly Japan, the U.S.,the U.K. and Germany), it considers the nature of the system and ways ofpreferable controlling of the airports.Currently in 2016, privatization of airports is progressing in Japan. Forexample, privatization of Kansai International Airport and Itami Airportwas carried out and they are operated as privatized airports from this April.Plus, Sendai Airport has also been privatized early this year and the newcompany which was founded by the new management rights holder is goingto run the airport from this June. In addition to above, there are many otherconsiderations of privatization are currently done for other airports.Therefore, this paper looks at the methods and risk of privatization ofairports. In particular, what kind of approaches are adopted as methods ofprivatization of airports, what kind of legal risks the methods would holdare to be considered by comparing other countries’ methods and cases ofprivatization of airports. Then the indication for future consideration on thelegal methods and risks of privatization of airports of Japan and other countriesare compared and basis for future consideration will be examined.This paper first introduces the methods to privatize the airports andconsider the ways of privatization of airports. Then this paper will look at theactual cases of other countries where privatization of the airport actually wassuccessful and not successful. Finally, this paper considers and analyzes therisk of the governments how they should take the responsibility to guaranteethe outcome or service by thinking of the methods of the privatization ofairports which currently is also progressing in Japan on the comparison of thelegal systems of that of other countries.

著者

Didvalis Linas

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

社会科学ジャーナル = The Journal of Social Science (ISSN:04542134)

巻号頁・発行日

no.77, pp.79-99, 2014-03-31

---

The forestry industry in Fukushima is in a difficult position becauseradioactive contamination was spread over large areas during the accident at theDaiichi nuclear power plant. Forests inside the evacuation zone cannot be usedfor timber production, nor can they be properly maintained. Outside theevacuation zone, the forestry industry has been damaged by warnings aboutradioactive pollution, tests that showed their products were not suitable forconsumption, and distrust among consumers about the safety of Fukushima’sforests, all of which has led to a drop in prices.There is no quick and easy way to repair the damage. Although thegovernment has pledged to implement the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) bydeclaring that the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) is liable for thefinancial costs of the accident, governmental regulations only require the ownerof the nuclear power plant to be responsible for certain economic costs, with therest to be left for future consideration. As a result, forestry concerns are not onan equal footing with human environments or agriculture. Two and a half yearsafter the accident, there are still no criteria for how to evaluate damage tostanding forests, no plans to start forest decontamination, and no flexibility forindividual forest owners to decide which type of damage restoration isappropriate for their forest.In this article, I argue that implementation of the PPP for the radioactivecontamination of Fukushima’s forests has several major limitations. Theselimitations must be overcome if just compensation is to be made to theforest owners, workers in the forestry industry, and the residents ofFukushima. However, as TEPCO already finds itself in a very difficultfinancial position, implementing a comprehensive compensation mechanismfor forest damage may well be too much for the company to manage; theoutcome would be that pollution damage compensation is eventually paidby the forest owners themselves or covered by taxpayers’ money. If thatoccurs, the difficulty in applying the PPP in Fukushima’s case will becomean additional strong argument against the use of nuclear power.