Send message to Authors

Paper short abstract

Through four examples from public health-related policies, we illustrate the range of governance tools used in Japan today and show how they are productively combined. Under what conditions are Japanese policymakers likely to adopt informal versus legalistic tools of governance?

Paper long abstract

Tools of governance may range along a continuum from “soft law” to “hard law” but often they also coexist, even within the same piece of legislation, and can complement each other. Through the paradigmatic case of Japan, this paper challenges the common but over-simplified dichotomy between “soft” and “hard” law. Japan employs various tools of governance, ranging from unenforceable recommendations to binding clauses. Yet, the literature on Japanese governance tends to focus on administrative guidance, bureaucratic informalism, and other “soft law” tools. Informal tools of governance were seen as fostering cooperative relationships that encouraged compliance in a cost-effective manner. While these analyses of Japanese governance were not wrong, this paper suggests that they are more of a caricature that fails to capture the interesting coexistence and complementarity of soft and hard law and other tools of governance.

Through four examples from public health-related policies, we illustrate the range of governance tools used in Japan today and show how they are productively combined. We examine regulations related to food and nutrition education, secondhand smoke prevention, covid prevention, and bicycle helmets. Regulations existed in the first two for at least ten years, whereas the latter two issues are newer. While in each case governance measures aim to induce individual citizens’ behavioral changes, the consequences of such behavioral change will be felt by society at large. Citizens should thus have a strong interest in the success of the governance approach employed. Drawing on these four illustrative mini-cases, our paper will detangle patterns of governance and analyze the conditions under which Japanese policymakers are likely to adopt informal versus legalistic tools of governance. Through a typology of different tools of governance, we strive to contribute to our understanding of state-citizen interactions and more specifically regulatory practices and mechanisms in contemporary Japan.