Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

The paper tries to examine the changes in Japan’s agricultural policy by exploring the definitions of some key policy terms such as “the food self-sufficiency rate” and “bearers of agriculture.” It argues that as their meanings changed overtime, a major shift occurred in Japan’s agricultural policy.

Paper long abstract

Japan’s agricultural policy has been aimed “to improve the food self-sufficiency rate” and “to foster bearers [ninaite] of farming.” Even though these goals remained unchanged for several decades, the actual policy measures to achieve them have altered from time to time. The conventional explanation that focuses on interests of political actors [farmers, the governing party, and the Agricultural Ministry] have difficulties in explaining the incremental policy change, because their interests have remained largely the same. This study proposes a new explanation focusing on the definitions of such key policy terms as “the food self-sufficiency rate” and “bearers of agriculture.” The author hypothesizes that changes in the definition of those terms that defined some policy goals brought about a major shift in Japan’s agricultural policy. To test the hypothesis, the author conducts a historical analysis of Japan’s agricultural policy between the 1970s and the 2010s. In the analysis, the author explores policy discourse concerning agricultural policy among policymakers, the media, and intellectuals by conducting text analyses of such materials as the Japanese Agricultural Ministry’s policy documents, the minutes from the Japanese Diet, and the articles of Japanese newspapers. Also, the author conducts a set of interview survey of Japanese policymakers such as Diet members and retired bureaucrats. Through the analyses, the author tries to present the evidence for the causal link between the definition of key policy terms and a shift in Japan’s agricultural policy. The author expects to detect the changes in the meanings of those key terms, the ways in which those changes were translated into actual policies, and the reasons why the meanings and policies changed during the time period.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

This study analyzes four recent METI reports (2019–2025) to show how Japan's concept of agile governance is shaped by four distinct sociotechnical imaginaries. Global ideas regarding AI governance are adapted to emphasize flexibility, collaboration, and competitiveness in pursuit of Society 5.0.

Paper long abstract

This paper analyzes Japan’s transition to agile governance through an in-depth examination of the policy discourse surrounding the formulation of Japan’s AI Law. Grounded in the concept of sociotechnical imaginaries, the study explores how shared visions of technology, society, and governance co-evolve within Japan’s consensus-oriented political economy. Empirically, the analysis focuses on four editions of the “Advisory Council for a New Governance Model for Society 5.0” reports published between 2019 and 2025 under the auspices of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI). These reports serve as key coordination devices linking governmental, industrial, and expert perspectives on emerging technologies.

Using qualitative content analysis, the paper identifies four dominant imaginaries underpinning Japan’s approach to agile governance: human-centric innovation aligned with Society 5.0, risk-responsive and adaptive regulation, collaborative public–private governance, and alignment with international regulatory norms. The study traces how these imaginaries evolve over time in response to rapid advances in artificial intelligence as well as heightened global regulatory activity, most notably the European Union’s AI Act.

The findings demonstrate that while Japan draws heavily on globally circulating narratives emphasizing trustworthy and accountable AI, these ideas are selectively reframed to prioritize regulatory flexibility, policy experimentation, and industrial competitiveness. This reframing reflects Japan’s broader strategic objective of balancing innovation promotion with risk management without resorting to rigid, ex ante legal constraints. The paper further highlights both synergies and tensions among the four imaginaries, showing how their interaction enables a multi-dimensional governance strategy while also generating unresolved trade-offs between legal certainty, adaptability, and international harmonization.

Overall, the study argues that the METI reports play a performative role in institutionalizing agile governance by mobilizing stakeholders, shaping expectations, and legitimizing incremental regulatory approaches. In doing so, they embed Japan’s AI Law within the broader national project of realizing Society 5.0.

Keywords: agile governance; AI regulation; sociotechnical imaginaries; Japan’s AI Law; Society 5.0; METI; public–private collaboration; comparative AI governance.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

How do municipal governments in Japan cope with various types of debris, in addition to household waste, when natural disasters such as earthquakes and floods occur? While tracing their activities, this study pays particular attention to the central government’s underlying intention to assist them.

Paper long abstract

Municipal governments in Japan have traditionally managed daily waste for many years, even as decentralization has been developing since the 1990s. However, natural disasters in recent years, such as earthquakes and floods, have generated large quantities of debris. How do these governments cope with such debris, in addition to household waste, in case of emergency? By tracing their activities after the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, this article examines the idea of “state will,” which refers mainly to the central government’s efforts to reassert centralized control through several projects of Japan’s Ministry of the Environment, despite the ongoing decentralization process. The findings reveal that more attention should be paid to the hidden politics of environmental governance, as illustrated in this case.

Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

Why has Taiwan substantially narrowed the gender gap in politics while Japan has not? Drawing on two decades of nomination and election data, this paper compares Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan to show how institutions, elite recruitment pathways, and partisanship shape gender gaps in politics.

Paper long abstract

Despite sharing advanced economic development, democratic institutions, and broadly similar socio-cultural contexts, Japan continues to lag significantly behind Taiwan in gender equality in politics. This paper revisits this well-known puzzle by asking a more specific question: why has Taiwan been able not only to elect more women, but also to sustain their political careers over time, while Japan has struggled to do so?

Building on original nomination, election, and re-election data and elite interviews with legislators, this study adopts a comparative perspective that places Japan at the centre of analysis, with South Korea and Taiwan serving as analytically strategic contrasts. Applying a mixed-method approach, the paper highlights three underexplored dimensions. First, it shows how differences in electoral institutions—particularly the design and practical operation of mixed electoral systems—create distinct opportunity structures for women’s long-term political survival. Second, it examines personal pathways into politics, including the role of political families and inherited networks, which remain unusually salient in Taiwan and disproportionately benefit female politicians. Third, it reassesses the role of partisanship, arguing that gender equality largely functions as a broadly non-partisan, valence issue in Taiwan, while remaining deeply politicised and polarised in Japan (and South Korea).

Rather than presenting gender equality as a simple outcome of quotas or cultural change, the paper conceptualises women’s presence in politics as a career-contingent process, shaped by institutional incentives, elite recruitment practices, and partisan competition. By situating Japan’s experience within a broader East Asian comparison, the paper contributes to Japanese studies by offering a reframed explanation for Japan’s persistent gender gap—one that foregrounds political structure and career sustainability over participation alone.