The State of Political Science in Japanpaperroom.ipsa.org/papers/paper_4049.pdf · The State of...

1

The State of Political Science in Japan

Masaki Taniguchi*

POLITICAL SCIENCE IN JAPAN: ITS HISTORY

The history of political science in Japan dates back to 1877. This was the year

when Tokyo University, now the University of Tokyo, was founded as Japan’s first

modern-style university. The university consisted of four faculties: Law, Science,

Letters, and Medicine. Interestingly, the professorship for Political Science was not

grouped in the faculty of Law at the time of founding, but in the First Division of the

Faculty of Letters, along with professorships of History and Philosophy. It was in 1885

that the faculties at Tokyo University were reorganized and the professorships for

Political Science, along with Economics, were reestablished under the Faculty of Law,

and it was by this reestablishment that the Faculty of Law in Tokyo University came to

deal with the research and education of law, political science, and economics, or the

majority of social sciences:1. Moreover, this reestablishment is the root cause for the

fact that most Japanese political scientists today belong to the Faculty of Law. That is,

since the vast majority of Japanese universities followed Tokyo University’s

classification, even today most political scientists in Japan belong to the Faculty of Law.

In 1893, the University adopted the Chair system, and accordingly a Chair of

Political Science and Political History was established in the Faculty of Law. However,

the appointment of a full-time professor would come almost a decade later: it was only

in 1901 that the first full-time professor, Kiheiji Onozuka, was appointed to the Chair of

Political Science and Political History. Also, although political science has been taught

in the University from its founding, whether in the Faculty of Letters or Law, for several

decades the teachers were either foreigners (such as Ernest Francisco Fenollosa and

Karl Rathgen) or bureaucrats (such as Sadatake Koba, who belonged to the Ministry of

Education).

* Associate Professor at the University of Tokyo and Chairperson of the JPSA

International Exchange Committee. ADDRESS: Graduate Schools for Law and Politics,

University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan [email:

[email protected]]. 1 Chairs for Economics were grouped under the Faculty of Law until 1919, when it was

spinned out to form a Faculty of Economics.

2

After 1901, the University enhanced its chairs related to political science. By

1942, there were seven chairs under the Faculty of Law, including History of Western

Political Thought, Political Science, History of Oriental Political Thought, Political

History, History of Diplomacy, Public Administration, and American Politics, History

and Diplomacy (The University of Tokyo 1985).

According to Royama(1949), modern Japanese Political Studies consists of two

schools2. The first is the Kokka-gakuha, or Staatslehre school. Under the strong

influence of the German Staatsrecht (studies of state law), this school was based on

Staatlehre (studies of the state), which assumed that the Rechtsstaat, or the state ruled

by law as absolute. Most of the chairs in Japanese national Universities including Tokyo

University, may be classified under this school. The other school, the Zissho-gakuha

(positivist school), dealt with dynamics of political issues and constitutional thoughts

and sought to make an empirical analysis of them, therefore focusing more on studying

political phenomena than pursuing research of states. This Zissho-gakuha was in

contrast with the Kokka-gakuha in a number of ways, in that Zissho-gakuha had Waseda

University as its place of origin, one of the oldest and most prominent privately

established universities in Japan; many of those who comprised the school were

journalists; and the school were under the strong influence of political science of

England and the United States at that time. The methodologies were also different:

while the Zissho-gakuha had history at its core, the Kokka-gakuha used law as its

research method.

It should be noted here that there was little, if any, civil liberties in pre Second

World War Japan, and this also imposed a restriction on political science. In prewar

Japan, except for the short period between the end of the First World War and early

1930s, lack of academic freedom limited the activities of political scientists. Prewar

academic achievements of Japanese political science were mostly restricted to

adaptations of the “latest” topics and methods of the European political science, rather

than observation of the Japanese political situation and identification of its own issues.

In other words, there was a wide gap between actual politics, which should have been

the main focus of prewar political science, and what each of the academics in the field

was allowed to pursue. So remote was the latter from the former that, even when Japan

was defeated in the War and academic freedom was guaranteed, the academics

themselves had to assert that Japanese political science had no tradition whatsoever to

be “restored” (Maruyama 1947).

2 Royama (1949) and Maruyama (1946) in this paragraph are based on classifications

made by Taguchi (2001).

3

Such was the context behind the so-called Postwar Political Science (sengo

seijigaku). In the postwar period, it was emphasized that political science should

accurately reflect the interests and concerns toward actual politics, and that analysis

should be closely related to a value judgment. An outstanding work of this period is

Maruyama (1946), which brilliantly carved out the characteristics of Fascism in Prewar

Japan by comparing it with Fascism of the Nazis. No other work has left a greater

impact on Japanese political science; it is regarded as a classic in the field.

Maruyama’s work paved the way for Postwar Japanese Political Science to

develop in terms of quality. However, the field would make dramatic progress also in

terms of quantity. Indeed, Japanese political science in the postwar era made great

developments in the number of academics entering the field. Much of this development

was caused by a sharp rise in demand for lecturers of political science at university level.

The rise came about as a result of the Postwar Educational Reform, in which the prewar

secondary education system, which was segmented according to target professions (e.g.

universities, high schools, professional training colleges, teachers training colleges) was

disintegrated and universities were reestablished under the new system. Many of the

new universities centered around the liberal arts, teaching all aspects of the humanities,

social sciences, and natural sciences; hence the demand for political scientists arose as

part of the overall rise in demand for lecturers. Such developments in both quality and

quantity eventually led to the foundation of the Japanese Political Science Association

(JPSA) in 1948.

If the first major development in Japanese political science came with the

arrival of the postwar era, then the second major development came in the late 1980s.

This development is most typically represented by the launch of the journal Leviathan

in 1987. Leviathan criticized the mainstream political studies of the time, arguing that

Japanese politics was studied only marginally by researchers in the fields of history,

foreign studies, or history of thought, based on impressionistic, subjective attitudes.

Rather, it was argued, that studies of Japanese political science should be conducted in a

scientific way, free from any specific values (Inoguchi, Otake, and Muramatsu 1987). It

is true that there had been some studies that applied the methods of behavioral studies

on contemporary Japanese political issues such as studies on voting behavior3; however,

it is Leviathan which opened up a new arena of political science, both in terms of

quality and quantity. In fact, as Leviathan thrived, Japanese political science reached a

higher level. To take an example, 1994 saw a Chair of Contemporary Japanese Politics

3 Examples include studies by Jun-ichi Kyogoku, Ichiro Miyake, and Michitoshi

Takabatake.

4

being established for the first time in the Faculty of Law at The University of Tokyo,

where Japanese political studies had previously been placed under the Chair of Political

Process.

Two points should be pointed out in relation to the developments led by

Leviathan since the 1980s (Taniguchi 2007). Firstly, it should be noted that the aim of

Leviathan was not to lead a revolution by means of a series of empirical studies of

Japanese politics. Rather, its aim was to cause a movement, which would promote the

application of “empirical” methodologies to Japanese political studies. Empirical

approach was an area that was seen at that time to be lacking in momentum as compared

to political history, political philosophy, and social critiques. The fact that Leviathan’s

aim was a movement may be confirmed in the launch of another journal “Nihon Seiji

Kenkyu (Japanese Political Studies)” led by two of the co-editors of Leviathan,

Inoguchi and Kabashima in 2004. (For reference, the founding editors of Leviathan

were Takashi Inoguchi, Hideo Otake, and Michio Muramatsu, with Ikuo Kabashima and

Haruhiro Fukui joining later). Nihon Seiji Kenkyu pursued an apparently opposite

approach to that of Leviathan: it was stated that the journal would seek not only

empirical or theoretical developments of Japanese political studies, but also seek to

boost historical approaches and interests in the field. This seemingly contrasting

orientation is actually along the same line ---- what the editors were trying to do is to

encourage diverse approaches to be tried out in order for Japanese political studies to

develop further.

Another point that should be noted on the development after the 1980s is the

generation gap. The gap exists not between the leaders of the Postwar Political Science,

and the founding editors of Leviathan, although the two generations run counter in

terms of methodologies employed. These two generations had both experienced the

defeat of the country, have gone through the postwar political and economical confusion

followed by the rapid economic growth in the sixties, as well as the Japanese version of

the “political years”: the student movements and civil movements in the sixties and

seventies. The generation gap exists, rather, between these generations and those who

grew up in the post-economic growth era. The latter younger generation who has

adopted the behavioral method, tend to regard politics as a game, and find little

difficulty in excluding norms from their analyses. This is where the gap lies ---- in the

level of exclusion of norms from analyses by the two generations.

JPSA: AN OVERVIEW

5

As we saw in the previous section, the Japanese Political Science Association

(JPSA) was founded in 1948, and now has 1,650 members4. Besides JPSA there are a

number of associations for the sub-fields of political science, including The Japan

Association of International Relations5, The Japanese Society for Public Administration,

Japanese Association of Electoral Studies, Public Policy Studies Association Japan,

Japan Association for Comparative Politics, and The Japanese Conference for the Study

of Political Thought. All of these associations form a mild collaboration, as can

typically be observed in the 2006 IPSA World Congress held in Japan, where JPSA was

the host and the six associations were supporting organizations.

Let us look at the gender and age distribution of JPSA members6. In terms of

gender ratio7, males vastly outnumber females, with a male-female ratio of 1398 to 145.

This is about the same level or a little lower than the figure for all researchers in Japan,

where the female ratio is 11.9%, according to the 2006 Survey of Research and

Development conducted by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC)

Statistics Bureau. As for JPSA members, the younger age group has a higher female

ratio (excluding age 20-29, with a much smaller membership base compared to other

age groups), which might indicate that female political scientists are gradually growing

in number8.

In terms of age distribution, age 20-29 account for 1.0%; age 30-39 for 19.1%,

age 40-49 for 25.4%, age 50-59 for 24.0%, age 60-69 for 18.7%, and age 70-79 for

11.7% (Figure 1). One reason for the small percentage of younger age groups should be

that JPSA did not accept membership of graduate students studying for their M.A.

degrees. In 2007 the rules have been altered to accept such graduate students as

members, therefore the percentage of the younger age groups, those in their twenties

and thirties, is expected to rise in future.

4 As of December 2007. 5 Founded in 1956, the JAIR has over 1500 members. This is likely due to the fact that

JAIR accepts membership of graduate students studying for their M.A. degrees and

those majoring in international economics, not that the vast majority of Japanese

political scientists specialize in international relations. 6 Figures in this paragraph have been calculated using JPSA Membership List (June

2006); age distribution was calculated as of 2007 based on year of birth. Other studies

based on this List include Inoguchi (1995, using the 1983 List) and Taguchi (2001, using

the 1995 List). 7 Gender ratio has been estimated based on each member ’s name, since the List does

not include sex; therefore there is a certain amount of missing data. 8 There, however, may be some deviation, since the majority of female members do not

have their year of birth shown on the List.

6

[Figure 1 Here]

JPSA holds an Annual Meeting in early October, alternately in Tokyo and

non-Tokyo areas. The 2007 Conference had 1 Plenary Session, 42 Panels, and 1 Poster

Session, with a total of 700 participants in three days.

Its journal, The Annuals of Japanese Political Science Association, consists of

250 to 300 pages in A5 format, published biannually since 2005 (annually until 2004).

The Annuals consists of featured articles, peer-reviewed articles, book reviews, and

“Perspective on Political Science”, in which selected books by members published in

the preceding year are introduced. Becoming biannual means more opportunities for

peer-reviewed articles to be accepted, and shorter lead time from acceptance to

publication, therefore the Annuals is expected to increase its presence as a

peer-reviewed journal.

In 2007, JPSA accepted founding Research Committees within the Association,

which are research groups of more than eight members (more than six of which are

JPSA members) collaborating under a specific topic related to political science. Once

founded, they may make a request to run a session in the Annual Meeting. Research

Committees may promote collaborative research between JPSA members as well as

create momentum within the Association.

As for cross-national partnerships, JPSA has entered into Agreements on

Regular Scholarly Exchange with APSA, the Korean PSA, PSA, and the Russian PSA,

under which there is a researcher exchange program enabling presentations at annual

meeting in partner countries. JPSA became an affiliated association with IPSA in 1952.

In 1985 Kinhide Mushanokoji became the first President from Japan, serving until 1988.

Japan has hosted three round tables; in 1982 (Tokyo), in 1994 (Kyoto), and in 2005

(Fukuoka), as well as the 20th

World Congress 2006 in Fukuoka, where a record-high

2094 participants from 76 countries participated.

POLITICAL SCIENCE EDUCATION AND RESEARCHES AT UNIVERSITIES

The JPSA Membership List has 1042 members who are either Professors,

Associate Professors9, Assistant Professors, or Research Associates belonging to a total

of 296 universities (either national, local, or private). 29 of these universities have 10 or

more JPSA members (Table 1)

9 Including Senior Associate Professors, a position specific to International Christian

University.

7

[Table1 Here]

In Japan there is no university that has a Faculty of Politics. In the case of The

University of Tokyo, where the greatest number of members belongs, JPSA members

have a position in a wide range of faculties. While many of them are listed under

Graduate Schools for Law and Politics / Faculty of Law, fewer members belong to the

Graduate School / Faculty of Arts and Science, Institute of Social Science, Institute of

Oriental Culture, among others. Table 2 shows which faculty JPSA members who are

full-time university lecturers belong to. We can see that the greatest number of members

are listed under the Faculty of Law; while others belong to faculties coupled with

economics (Faculty of Political Science and Economics, Faculty of Policy Studies),

form a part of the humanities (Faculty of Humanities), or allocated within faculties

related to foreign studies (Faculty of Foreign Languages, Faculty of International

Studies).

[Table2 Here]

How many doctorates with a degree in political science are there in Japan? It is

difficult to answer this question; in order to know why, we must first have a quick

overview of the university degree system in Japan.

In Japan, those graduating from a 4-year university earn bachelor ’s degrees,

who then enter graduate schools, earning their master’s degree after completing a 2-year

term. After that they go on to complete a 3-year Ph.D. course, submit a dissertation

thesis and on successfully defending it, they earn a Ph.D. degree10

. Usually degrees take

the form of “B.A. in xxx” or “Ph.D. in xxx”, where xxx stands for the name of their

faculty ---- and this is where the difficulty lies. That is, since the majority of those who

want to specialize in political science receive their education in the Faculty of Law,

which means that they will eventually earn a Ph.D. in Law. Given that, naturally, those

who major in Law will also earn a Ph.D. in Law, it is hence difficult to extract from

Ph.D.s in Law those who specialize in political sciences.

However, we may say that, on a yearly basis, there are at least 30 political

scientists who earn a Ph.D. degree. This number is derived based on the JPSA

10 University of Tokyo and Kyoto University adopt a scholarly system in which

bachelors, on finishing their undergraduate course, are appointed directly as Research

Associate; therefore, many of the Professors who are graduates of these two Universities

hold no more than a B.A. degree.

8

Membership List mentioned above, that is, 603 members who are aged 40 to 59 plus

members whose age are not shown. Figures of graduate student members do exist:

according to the JPSA Membership List as of April 2006, 93 members were Ph.D.

candidates. However, we must take into account a considerable base of those who

become a JPSA member after they obtain a permanent position, due to the fact that

JPSA did not accept M.A. candidates’ membership until a few years ago. One thing is

certain: if there are at least 30 Ph.D.s majoring in political science every year, the

number is expected to be on the rise, given the expansion of the JPSA membership base.

The M.A. programs itself is also undergoing change. Once considered as the

first two years for getting a Ph.D., things have changed since the foundation of Graduate

Schools of Public Policy/Public Management in Waseda University in 2003, followed

by University of Tokyo, Kyoto University, Hokkaido University, Tohoku University

among many others. Part of a wider development of Professional Schools, these

graduate schools are a Japanese version of leading American graduate schools including

John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, the Woodrow Wilson

School at Princeton University, and the School of International and Public Affairs at

Columbia University. These new graduate schools in Japan have led to a much broader

base of graduate students studying political science, and to a diversified career path for

M.A. holders.

SPECIALITIES OF JAPANESE POLITICAL SCIENTISTS

JPSA members are allowed to list up to three subfields of specialty by choosing

from 57 given areas. Figure 2 shows the age distribution of 17 specialties which 50 or

more members have named11

.

Note that the term Political Theory (Seiji-riron/Seiji-gaku) in the figure does

not refer to Political Thought or Political Theory. Actually, the word is not used in the

strict sense of the term, but rather it might be better to consider it as a translation for

Political Science or Political Studies ---- quite a broad term. Why is such a term used?

Actually, Seiji-riron/Seiji-gaku is a term commonly applied when a chair related to

political science is established in a small university for the first time. And since political

scientists who are listed under the chair are required by their universities to use the term

as their specialty, those who apparently specialize in Political Theory becomes large in

number.

Apart from that, we can see that major areas of interest include History of

11 Members without age description have been excluded.

9

European Political Thought, History of Japanese Politics, Local Government and

Administration, Comparative Politics/Area Studies, Public Administration. One

characteristic peculiar to Japan may be the relatively strong base of those specializing in

Political Thought and Political History.

[Figure2 Here]

Age distribution varies between subfields of specialization. On the one hand,

subfields with a higher presence of those over 60 include: History of European Political

Thought, History of Japanese Politics, Political Philosophy/Ethics, and History of

Japanese Political Thought. On the other hand, younger scholars aged under 40 tend to

have a greater presence in subfields such as Political Process, Local Government and

Administration, and Electoral Study/Voting Behavior.

This tendency is even more apparent in Table 3, which is a ranking of the five

most popular specialties by age. Looking at age 70+, we see that the five most popular

majors are Political Theory, History of Japanese Politics, History of European Political

Thought, Contemporary Japanese Politics, and History of Japanese Political Thought.

However, turning to age 60-69, we notice that only three out of five specialties are

shared; age 50-59, a mere two out of five; and as for ages through 30 to 49, the only

specialty which the two age groups have in common is Political Theory, the

all-inclusive term.

Why are Political Process and Comparative Politics popular among the

younger academics? Part of the popularity may be due to the impact of the Leviathan

group noted earlier; they indeed have had a profound influence on succeeding

generations. And part of it may be due to the creation of academic positions in these

areas, in 1970s and since the 1990s. Among the traditional subfields of political science,

we notice that Public Administration is relatively popular. This likely reflects the

establishment of Faculty of Policy Studies in several universities in the 1990s and the

establishment of a number of Graduate Schools of Public Policy/Public Management

after 2000, both of which have led to expansion in the number of students studying, and

accordingly, lecturers teaching the subject.

This demonstrates that three things are required in order for a new subfield, at

least of Japanese political science, to establish itself. One is the existence of outstanding

pioneering work(s), to attract other academics to enter the subfield; another is the

presence of outstanding educator(s) who are highly capable of developing a new

generation of researchers; and lastly, the establishment of an institutional infrastructure

10

that offers enough academic positions for younger researchers.

[Figure3 Here]

The second requirement, namely providing capable educators, would be not

much of a problem, given a steadily growing base of political scientists. Though some

fields may be more advantageous than others in this respect, the overall advantage is

that there are now well-written textbooks in each subfield, and that university academics,

including political scientists but also those of other disciplines, are much more

concerned about faculty development than they used to.

Let us now turn to the first requirement, the need for outstanding pioneering

works. Here we shall cite the field of Quantitative Research on Contemporary Japanese

Politics, and introduce some of the world-class research projects and its published data,

which is one of the major achievements of the projects. As noted above, this is one of

the fields with the greatest numbers of newcomers, and which is where the author

specializes. The last requirement, the establishment of an institutional infrastructure, we

will deal with in the next Section.

The first example of a world-class research project is Japanese Election

Studies(JES), which is a survey on the political awareness/values and voting behavior of

citizens. JES is comparable to ANES (American National Election Studies), a well-

known large-scale public survey. The JES project was launched in 1983, and initially

was aimed to serve as a Japanese version of ANES12

. However, since JES II, conducted

in 1993 (by Ikuo Kabashima, Joji Watanuki, Ichiro Miyake, Yoshiaki Kobayashi,

Ken’ichi Ikeda), the survey has employed multiple waves of panel surveys ---- which is

very rare and a globally outstanding characteristic. JES II performed as many as seven

waves of surveys ranging from the 1993 pre-election to the 1996 post-election. These

seven waves of surveys led to detailed records of how the voters responded to a

succession of rapid political changes of 1993-1996. Indeed, these years saw the ending

of the LDP’s long reign, the appointment and hasty resignation of five prime ministers,

reorganization of political parties (i.e. the breaking up of LDP and the Socialist Party

and the formation of New Frontier Party and DPJ), and the electoral system reform

leading to a shift from the single nontransferable vote system to the simple plurality

12 Ichiro Miyake, JES leader and the pioneer in Japanese electoral studies, was chosen

as the second most influential political scientist in a questionnaire commemorating the

50th anniversary of the founding of JPSA, following Masao Maruyama, almost a byword

of postwar political science (Kobayashi 2001).

11

voting system/proportional representation system13

. Following JES II, JES III (by

Ken’ichi Ikeda, Yoshiaki Kobayashi, and Hiroshi Hirano) conducted an astounding nine

waves of panel surveys ranging from the 2001 election for the House of Councilors to

the 2005 election of the House of Representatives14。

Japan participates in the Global Barometer Survey project. Inspired by the

Eurobarometer in the 1970s, the project was launched in order to generate a worldwide

database related to democracy, prosperity, and human security. The Japanese team

consists of Ken’ichi Ikeda, Yoshitaka Nishizawa, Masahiro Yamada, Naoko Taniguchi,

and Satoko Yasuno15

. There is also another barometer, the AsiaBarometer, led by

Takashi Inoguchi, which conducts annual surveys in East/South/South-East/Central

Countries of Asia. This Barometer focuses on micro-level data such as the daily life

patterns, attitudes and values of ordinary citizens16

. With Asia, one of the most

rapidly-growing areas both in terms of population and economy, as its target, the survey

will surely be of a great contribution to the political sciences of the world, by recording

social change in the form of data.

Another example of a project includes two research surveys on political elites.

The first is the University of Tokyo/Asahi Shimbun Survey led by Ikuo Kabashima and

Masaki Taniguchi. This is a survey targeted at candidates running for national elections

from 2003 onwards, asking them about their attitudes toward various policy issues17

.

This survey is characteristic in that it has overcome the greatest bottleneck in politician

surveys, namely the low response rate, by collaborating with a nationwide press. Given

that the results are published across the country, the response rates of this survey are

over 90%, thereby ensuring a high reliability of data. Another advantage of

collaboration is the ability to conduct a public survey with the same questions as the

candidate survey. This makes it possible to compare changes in attitude of candidates

and the public directly.

The second example of a leading research on political elites is a Survey on

Policy Actors done by a research group led by Michio Muramatsu. This survey is based

13 Data published at http://www.kh-web.org/research/archive/jes2. A Code book was

prepared by Kabashima, Watanuki, Miyake, Kobayashi, and Ikeda(1998). 14 Data published at http://ssjda.iss.u-tokyo.ac.jp/abstract/0530a.html, with a

Codebook. 15 Data to be published. 16 Data published at https://www.asiabarometer.org with a Codebook. 17 Data published at http://www.j.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~masaki/ats/atsindex.html. Codebook

for the public survey prepared by Kabashima, Taniguchi, and Sugawara (2005, 2006);

Taniguchi and Uenohara(2008). Codebook for Politicians Survey prepared by

Kabashima and Yamamoto(2005); Kabashima(2008ab); Taniguchi and Okawa(2008).

12

on a systematic interview held once in about a decade from 1970s onwards on national

diet members, bureaucrats, and interest group leaders. It successfully presented a

long-term shift in the Japanese political process, namely modes of behavior of national

parliamentarians, norms and behaviors of interest groups, and how the bureaucrats, once

regarded as having an immense power, recognized their role18

THE FUTURE OF POLITICAL SCIENCE IN JAPAN

As we have seen so far, the presence of younger political scientists in the

subfields of Political History or History of Political Thought is declining, given a larger

percentage of older researchers in the field. However, since the overall base of political

scientists is expanding, it cannot be said that the two fields are no longer popular, or

researchers are turning to different areas. Rather, the change should be seen as a sign of

diversification: that Japanese political science, once limited to historical approaches,

have allowed itself a wider variety of initiatives to be taken, now embracing many other

subfields such as Contemporary Japanese politics and Comparative Politics as its areas

of research. Moreover, this diversification can also be seen in each of the subfields too.

To take Contemporary Japanese Politics as an example, the subfield has seen a wider

variety of research subjects, including such areas as not only bureaucracy, but also

political party, interest groups, mass media, and local politics.

If political science in Japan can be said to be following a “flying geese” pattern

of development, then the least developed areas may be political methodologies:

development of innovative statistical methods, Formal Theory, and Experimental

Political Science. However, it is possible to view the matter in an optimistic way and see

these areas as not being underdeveloped, but as having the greatest potential for growth.

A number of signs are well underway ---- under the current undergraduate entrance

examination system, many of those majoring in political science have strong

mathematical skills; diversification of research areas and subjects have promoted those

majoring in economics or the natural sciences to participate in political research or

conduct joint researches with political scientists; and several research teams with an aim

to establish a global center of excellence in Experimental Political Science have been

set up which, though still in the stage of incubation, have received substantial grants.

On the other hand, concerns also exist. A number of critics have spoken out,

including both advocates of Postwar Political Science and that of the Leviathan, that

18 As far as the author knows, data for this survey is not published. Major works

include Muramatsu and Kume (2006).

13

each of the research works have surely become more elaborate and detailed than before,

but at the same time the discipline itself become more fractionalized and

narrow-focused, and that there should be more daring, adventurous assumptions and

conceptualizations. Such fractionalization does not only refer to Contemporary Japanese

Politics, but also to Political History and History of Political Thought.

Incidentally, fractionalization and elaborateness is not always synonymous to

criticism. In the latter subfields, there have been a number of outstanding empirical

studies based on an intricate interpretation of texts and materials on a relatively limited

topic, rather than attempting to present the big picture. Earlier examples include studies

on Chinese diplomatic history by Masataka Banno, studies on Soviet history and the

formation of the Stalin Political Regime by Yuzuru Taniuchi; recent examples include

studies on republicanism thoughts by Arihiro Fukuda ---- all of which have been met

with acclaim for its elaborate processes from academic counterparts around the world,

including those from the relevant countries. Such works may not provide a firsthand

answer to the underlying issues of contemporary Japanese politics nor give a bird’s-eye

view of it (both of which had always been of interest, explicitly or implicitly, of Postwar

Political Science); however, it is obviously by stacking such solid blocks of elaborate

work one by one that the Japanese political science as a discipline can reach a broader,

deeper understanding of political phenomena.

Based on the situation we have seen so far, let us identify three areas of future

challenge for political science in Japan.

The first challenge would be to reactivate the interaction between the various

subfields, now fractionalized and isolated from each other. For example, graduate

students think it essential to narrow down their majors (e.g. Contemporary Japanese

Politics or Public Administration) and earn a degree without gaining an understanding

of other subfields (e.g. Political History or History of Political Thought). This is

especially true of universities with a Ph.D. program in political science, where

expansion in curriculum and faculty members has been undertaken. To overcome such

situation, the curricula for at least the MA program might be organized so as to ensure a

broader perspective of the discipline as a whole.

The second challenge for Japanese political science would be to promote

interaction with their global counterparts. Japanese political scientists should actively

publicize their works on domestic politics to the rest of the world. This may be driven

by the rapidly expanding base of Ph.D. graduates from universities outside Japan, and

by domestic researchers participating in long-term studies abroad and giving

presentations at overseas conferences. As we have introduced, there are many Japanese

14

works worth committing to international debate, whether in the field of Comparative

Politics and Foreign Studies, or in the aforementioned Political History and History of

Political Thought.

However, there is one thing that Japanese academics should keep in mind as

regards international comparison. That is, as far as political science is concerned, fields

of interest will obviously differ between countries; a same article will not always, as in

the case of natural science or economics, lead to a universal value among political

scientists of all countries. Unfortunately, some Japanese researchers do place excessive

value on citation indices of English journals ---- an attitude which stems from the severe

entrance examination system of Japanese universities, where applicants rely on

measurable indices of university rankings. However, placing too much emphasis on

citation indices is clearly nonsense; after all, no one would agree that the quality of the

New York Times with a daily circulation of 1 million should fall short of that of Soviet’s

Pravda in their heyday or Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun, both with ten times the daily

circulation (and neither of which are tabloids). In fact, no superiority or inferiority

whatsoever exists among the political sciences of each country, but rather coexist

alongside each other. Although comparative studies between political sciences of any

two given countries will lead to many findings, competition based solely on citation

indices should be strictly avoided.

The third challenge for Japanese political science is the need for an institutional

infrastructure dedicated to younger researchers, as mentioned in Section 4. While

Japanese graduate schools have accepted a greater number of graduate students and

Ph.D. holders, and the number of graduate students majoring in political science both

inside and outside Japan is steadily increasing, the fact is that now Japanese universities

cannot accommodate any more academic positions for political science. True, there was

a time when job openings in universities rose steadily with the increase in enrollment,

which was in accordance with the overall increase of the nation’s population. However,

as Japan faces a shrinking 18-year-old population, it is now evident that academic chairs

for political sciences are quite unlikely to see an increase in number. Moreover, it is also

clear that, apart from universities, job openings in Japan for Ph.D. graduates in

humanities and social sciences are scarce, to say the least. So difficult is it for Ph.D.

holders of political science to envision a bright outlook about their career path, that

many of the outstanding students choose not pursue an academic career. And such being

the case, future years may see a gradual degradation in the research level of younger

researchers ---- a trend Japan is already experiencing in some fields of natural sciences.

If Japanese political science is to follow the same path as that of the natural

15

sciences, then the actions to be taken should also be the same. That is, to give the

younger researchers a chance to open up new frontiers of the discipline, while to have

the older researchers or leaders of universities and academic circles engage in

establishing the infrastructure of the discipline as well as develop their previous studies

even further.

Most debates on the future of Japanese political science take the form of older

professors, prominent, close to retirement, and with a multitude of established works,

expressing hopes and desires to younger researchers, namely graduate students and

associate professors. However, this is not where the future lies. The future of Japanese

political science shall be, and should be, constructed by both the younger and the older

generations understanding their stake in the discipline and contributing accordingly.

16

REFERENCES

Inoguchi, Takashi. 1995. “Democracy and the Development of Political Science in

Japan.” In David Easton, John Gunnel and Michael Stein eds., Regime and

Discipline: Democracy and the Development of Political Science. Ann Arbor:

University of Michigan Press.

Inoguchi, Takashi, Hideo Otake, and Michio Muramatsu. 1987. “Leviathan Hakkan

Shushi.” [On Launching Leviathan] Leviathan 1:4-7.

Kabashima, Ikuo, and Koji Yamamoto. 2005. “The 2003 University of Tokyo/Asahi

Shimbun Politicians’ Survey Codebook.” Nihon Seiji Kenkyu 2(2): 392-418.

------. 2008a. “The 2004 University of Tokyo/Asahi Shimbun Politicians’ Survey

Codebook.” Nihon Seiji Kenkyu 5(1-2): 298-306.

------. 2008b. “The 2005 University of Tokyo/Asahi Shimbun Politicians’ Survey

Codebook.” Nihon Seiji Kenkyu 5(1-2): 283-297.

Kabashima, Ikuo, Masaki Taniguchi, and Taku Sugawara. 2005. “The 2003/04

University of Tokyo/Asahi Shimbun Survey Codebook.” Nihon Seiji Kenkyu 2(1):

190-208.

------. 2006. “The 2005 University of Tokyo/Asahi Shimbun Survey Codebook.” Nihon

Seiji Kenkyu 3(1): 157-159.

Kobayashi, Yoshiaki. 2001. “Nihon ni okeru Seijigaku no Igi to Houhou.” [The Method

and Meaning of Political Science in Japan] UP 30(5):20-24, (6):19-23, (7):17-21.

Maruyama, Masao. 1946. “Cho Kokka Shugi no Ronri to Shinri.” [Theory and

Psychology of Ultra-Nationalism] Sekai, May, 1946. (Reprinted in: Thought and

Behaviour in Modern Japanese Politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.)

------. 1947. “Kagaku to shite no Seijigaku.” [Politics as a Science in Japan] Jinbun 1(2).

(Reprinted in: Thought and Behaviour in Modern Japanese Politics, Oxford:

Oxford University Press.)

Muramatsu, Michio, and Ikuo Kume. 2006. Nihon Seiji Hendo no 30-nen. [Japanese

Politics: Changes in Three Decades] Tokyo: Toyo Keizai Shinpo Sha.

Royama, Masamichi. 1949. Nihon ni okeru Kindai Seijigaku no Hattatsu. [The

Development of Modern Political Science in Japan] Tokyo: University of Tokyo

Press.

Taguchi Fukuji. 2001. Sengo Nihon Seijigaku Shi. [A History of Political Science in

Postwar Japan] Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.

Taniguchi, Masaki. 2007. “Nihon Seiji Kenkyu ni okeru Approach no Approach.” [An

Approach to the Approaches to Japanese Political Studies] Leviathan 40: 196-204.

17

Taniguchi, Masaki, and Chihiro Okawa. 2008. “The 2007 University of Tokyo/Asahi

Shimbun Survey Codebook.” Nihon Seiji Kenkyu 5(1-2): 266-282.

Taniguchi, Masaki, and Hideaki Uenohara. 2008. “The 2007 University of Tokyo/Asahi

Shimbun Politicians’ Survey Codebook.” Nihon Seiji Kenkyu 5(1-2): 234-265.

The University of Tokyo. 1986. Tokyo Daigaku Hyaku-nen-shi. [One Hundred Year’s

History of the University of Tokyo] Vol. Bukyoku-shi 1. Tokyo: the University of

Tokyo.

18

Figure 1 JPSA Members’ Age Distribution

Age-2930-3940-4950-5960-6970+

400

300

200

100

0

19

Table 1 Universities with 10 or more JPSA Members

University Prefecture* N of members

Tokyo Tokyo 45

Waseda Tokyo 32

Keio Tokyo 27

Nihon Tokyo 25

Chuo Tokyo 21

Hosei Tokyo 20

Kobe Hyogo 18

Meiji Tokyo 17

Kokushikan Tokyo 16

Ritsumeikan Kyoto 16

Doshisha Kyoto 15

Kyushu Fukuoka 14

Kansai Osaka 13

Tokai Kanagawa 13

Kyoto Kyoto 12

Senshu Tokyo 12

Tohoku Miyagi 12

Hokkaido Hokkaido 12

Gakushuin Tokyo 11

Komazawa Tokyo 11

Takushoku Tokyo 11

Tokyo Metropolitan Tokyo 11

Rikkyo Tokyo 11

Kwansei Gakuin Hyogo 10

Niigata Niigata 10

Seikei Tokyo 10

Tsukuba Ibaragi 10

Nagoya Aichi 10

Kokugakuin Tokyo 10

* Place of a main campus

Note: Figures relate to Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant

Professors, and Research Associates belonging to universities in

Japan.

20

Table 2 Faculties with 10 or more JPSA Members

Facluty/School N of Members

Law 409

Political Science and Economics 66

Humanities 31

Letters 26

Policy Studies 25

Foreign Languages 23

Economics 23

Arts and Science 22

Education 19

International Studies 14

Law and Letters 12

International Relations 11

Note: Figures relate to Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant

Professors, and Research Associates belonging to universities in

Japan.

21

Figure 2 Specialties of JPSA Members

Note: Figures in brackets indicate total number of Members. Only specialties which 50 or more members have named are shown.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Political Theory (185)

History of European Political Thought (129)

History of Japanese Politics (127)

Local Government and Administration (117)

Comparative Politics/Area Studies (108)

Public Administration (107)

International Relations/ Diplomacy (97)

Political Process (94)

Contemporary Japanese Politics (87)

History of European Politics (80)

European Studies (77)

History of Japanese Political Thought (75)

History of Political Thought (73)

Political Philosophy/ Ethics (61)

History of International Politics/ Diplomacy (60)

International Political Theory (59)

Electoral Study/ Voting Behavior (54)

Age 70+

Age 60-69

Age 50-59

Age 40-49

Age 30-39

Age -29

22

Table 3 Five most popular specialties of JPSA Members by Age.

Age

70+ 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39

Political Theory 21.3%

History of European

Political Thought 15.6%




History of Japanese

Politics 17.0%

History of Japanese

Politics 12.1%

History of European


Comparative

Politics/Area Studies 12.2%

Local Government

and Administration 13.3%

History of European



Political Process 11.4%

Local Government


Political Process 12.0%

Contemporary

Japanese Politics 11.3%

International

Relations/ Diplomacy 9.4%

Public Administration 10.3%



History of Japanese


History of European

Politics 8.9%

Local Government


International

Relations/ Diplomacy 9.6%

Comparative

Politics/Area Studies 10.7%

The State of Political Science in Japanpaperroom.ipsa.org/papers/paper_4049.pdf · The State of...

Documents

Transcript of The State of Political Science in Japanpaperroom.ipsa.org/papers/paper_4049.pdf · The State of...