Abstract

In Japan, the urgent reform of social-economic system has been discussed. In this discussion, many people talk about what reform should we do, but no one talks about how should we do this. ”Iron triangle” has been said as the factor of preventing the reform in Japan. But in America, regardless of the existence of same triangle, complete reform has been done since 70’s. So, not such triangle but the Japanese policymaking system and its institution are the factor of preventing the reform.

This paper considers the institutional features of Japanese policymaking system in comparing America. We use “critical case-study” method and select the deregulation of airline in Japan and America as “critical case”. We proceeded comparative analysis by two-stage. At first, we analyze and pick out the features of the policymaking process of both cases by using “explanatory model”. This model is the modified version of Paul A. Sabatier’s Advocacy coalitions model (named as “Modified Sabatier’s Model”). Next, according to these features, we compare the both cases by using “comparative model”, and consider the institutional features of Japanese policymaking system. This model is composed by two contexts, named as “issue context” and “institutional context”, which prescribe the degree of reform. According to results of this two-stage analysis, we point out that there is two-structured policymaking in Japan and bureaucrat controls it. And we also point out the four elements to promote reform. First is the organization of group, named as “reform promoting group”, which has the belief of complete reform and the political resources and strategies to defeat the oppositions. Second is, in the stage of agenda setting, the existence of “policy entrepreneur” who creates the idea of reform and diffuses it. And also the effect of social-economic state and other reform is the second factor. Third is to set the agenda of reform comprehensively. Fourth is the institutional position and relations of the coreactors of “reform promoting group”.

Finally we consider how to implement the complete reform in Japan. We point out that in a long term we should change cozy relationships between bureaucracy and business, and in a short term we consider how to involve “policy elite” into actual policymaking controlled by bureaucrats.