In Japan, there has been a long tradition of activities for Public Understanding of Science and Technology (PUST). In this paper I discuss about the PUST movement and its history. While it is difficult to specify the starting point of such activities, we can recognize one of the most important year for the PUST movement in Japan. It was 1960 when the science week was established and Japan Science Foundation was founded. Japan Science Foundation is the first foundation that specialized to promoting public interest and understanding of science and technology. The second important year was 1996 when Japan Science and Technology Corporation (JST) was founded and PUST Team was set up in it. JST is one of the biggest funding agencies of science and technology in Japan. During those years there was little influence of overseas movements on Japan. But from around 2000 "Science Communication Movement" has been introduced from mainly UK. Now Japan's policy for promoting public engagement or awareness of science and technology has turned to Science Communication. In such a situation we should try to create Japan's way of science communication.

　 Communicators in Science and Technology Education Program (CoSTEP for short) was established in Hokkaido University in July 2005. This program is open not only to graduate students, but also to working publics. It is a one-year program, but no degree is granted. Tuition is free. The number of students has been 44 in the year of 2005 and 60 in 2006. The percentage of female and male is almost at the same rate.
　 The main features of CoSTEP are: 1) promoting two-way communication; 2) learning through practices; 3) community based science and technology communication activities. CoSTEP graduates are already taking initiative to promote science and technology communication in their communities and worksites.
　 There are several challenges for the future that we would like to work on: 1) matching human resource development and job market; 2) de-centralizing science and technology communication (encouraging science and technology communication in local communities); 3) contextualizing the CoSTEP program and the postgraduate education; 4) collaborating with other educational institutions or science centres.

　 Science Cafés are one of the most prominent activities among a wide variety of science communication initiatives in Japan. In the past few years, they have spread throughout the country widely, and gained exceptional public acknowledgement as such an enterprise. The characteristics of Japanese science cafés lie in the great diversity of styles and organizers. Such diversity may be a result of challenges to adapt the European origin science cafés to a Japanese culture. In this paper, the scope and challenge of Japanese science cafés are examined by comparison to their pioneers.
　 Science Cafés were born in France and in the United Kingdom around 1997. Although their styles and aims are different among both, a high priority is placed on the discussion in common, and plural standpoints are strongly emphasized. Such an emphasis on "public dialogue" can find its roots in the global change of the relation between science and society. Science cafés do not only bring about a new "mode" to talk about science, but also they cultivate a new relationship between science and society. For the future of Japanese science cafés, such aspects of "public dialogue" are worth serious consideration.

　 In Japanese society, civil society movements are not active. One of the most important characters of Japanese civil society movements is the lack of policy planning and its advocacy. Academicians, though usually defined as an intellectual sector of society, have no channel and little inclination to advocate their opinions. However recent changing situation demands scientists to explain their activities, achievements or philosophy.
　 In this paper, we overview major differences between the Japanese society and other societies of developed countries affecting the activities of promoting social dialogue about science, R&D or university education. Especially, we focus on (1) the role and activities of organizations in the West (like AAAS in the United States or Observa in Italy), (2) the way scientists are involved into them, and (3) social or cultural supports these organizations get from their societies.
　 In addition, we also explore the possible role of Non-Profit Organization in Japanese society by analyzing the activity of our NPO, Science Communication as a case.

　 The present study examined how media discourse on biotechnology using genetic engineering has changed in Japan. Specifically, using the online database of the Asahi newspaper, the annual numbers of articles concerning biotechnology were counted, and an analysis of the content was conducted. The results show three major findings: (i) the number of articles has gradually decreased since 2001, (ii) the frame of economic prospect has been considerably dominant since 2001, (iii) patterns of media discourse on "regulation," "food," and "concern" of biotechnology have dramatically changed, while patterns of media discourse on "medical issues," "generic research," and "economics" have remained stable. The discussion focuses on how biotechnology has been accepted as an accomplished fact under the frame of economic prospect by media discourse in Japan.

　 The present study examines determinants of the public's attitude formation toward biotechnological applications in Japan, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. Specifically, using quantitative survey data, we examine the relative influence of perceived benefit, risk, and moral acceptability on overall support or rejection of biotechnological applications, as well as the typical logic underlying public support or opposition of these applications. The study resulted in three major findings: (i)people distinguish sharply between different applications, and the level of support varies across each application according to different assessment of its benefit, risk and moral acceptability; (ii) perceived risk was much less influential to the overall decision of supporting or rejecting biotechnological applications than moral acceptability and perceived benefit; (iii) four prototypical logics of supporting/opposing biotechnological applications were identified. Taking all the results together, perceived moral acceptability appeared to act as a veto over deciding to support each application. Finally, we discuss the need for moral communication rather than risk communication.

　 The U. K. has a centralized regulatory system for animal experiment. This system is well accepted because it is regarded as good to keep the consistency of practice. This regulation is supported by three basic values; science-centrism, utilitarianism and anthropo-centrism. Science-centrism can be seen in the realization process of animal welfare. Animal welfare is effectively and objectively realized through the incorporation of the concept of animal welfare into the methods of science. Utilitarianism is evident in the decision-making process. The decision whether to permit a particular experiment is based on an analysis of the costs (in terms of animal suffering) against the likely benefit to be derived from the data sought. Anthropo-centrism seems to be an antithesis for science-centrism and utilitarianism. The anti-animal experiment movement is mostly driven by the emotional factors. An important means of breaking the deadlock between the movement and science is by protest in the society. The protest is regarded as the balancer of the U. K. society, and has certainly aided the realization of humane regulation.

　 The purpose of this case study on the collaboration between citizens and experts, dealing with the future plan of the estuary weir of the Yoshino River is to understand how we can create renewed public knowledge for solving the social problems associated with science and technology as first step of the study. In order to analyze the case, the collaboration patterns were classified based on the condition of information/knowledge-sharing and the relationship between citizens and experts. The condition of information/knowledge-sharing was classified into two types as unshared condition or shared condition, whereas the relationship between citizens and experts was classified into two types as soft relationship (relationship of trust) or hard relationship (conflicting relationship). The process of collaboration was classified into four phases as making issues, forming hypothesis, confirming by experiment, and synthesizing and practicing future scenario. In addition, the utilization of the citizens' and experts' knowledge was analyzed based on a scheme applied Johari's Window. The results were as follows. a) The collaboration pattern between citizens and experts transformed itself as the process of collaboration made progress. b) The citizens' and experts' knowledge learnt in the past experience was utilized in order to make common context required for increasing mutual understanding of the issue. Based on these results, the conceptual model for collaboration between citizens and experts was discussed.

　 Adaptive management is a systematic set of principles and tools that can continually improve management policies and practices because they are linked to the outcomes of operational programs. Effective adaptive management is based on the recognition of the linkages between scientific knowledge and the social aspects particular to each case.
　 In this paper, two main conclusions are shown through an analysis of the issueframing process in the case of a nature restoration program at Lake KASUMIGAURA, east-central Japan. First, the current pattern of issue framing in the nature restoration program is problematic because it is based only on the scientific view of the problem and solutions. Advocates of adaptive management argue that it is necessary to incorporate social aspects of human-nature relations to solve the problems. Second, adaptive management programs should include such social reflexive verification processes that repeatedly scrutinize the validity and findings of the issueframing process, on the assumption that any single way of issue framing cannot be infallible or complete.
　 How to design goals of operations and how to deal with the results as effective feedback are also essential questions in the practice of adaptive management programs. As mentioned above, the key is to focus on the social aspects and the issue framing processes in the operations themselves, not just on scientific issues. Otherwise, adaptive management programs will not themselves be 'adaptive'.

　 This paper attempts to evaluate ecological communications of the CSR by examining arguments over an article in The Economist journal that criticized the CSR as delusional and pernicious. On one hand, the delusional CSR, which was indicted for uncertain knowledge about environment, may pose a semantic problem for meaningful communication. On the other hand, the pernicious CSR, which was accused for leaving public values on the market for which no objective criteria are existed, may associate with a pragmatic problem in effective communication. Given that environmental science entails uncertainty, and also given imperfect information in the real market, trust in science and the market would be important for advancing the CSR. A questionnaire survey for staffs of CSR departments in 55 companies about the attitudes against the criticism, in fact, indicated that trust in science and the market may independently affect the degrees of considering social evaluation of their firms as important. In addition, such attitudes may depend on the position of a firm in the 'market for virtue', i. e. the market in which ecological and societal values are transacted, because firms at the intermediate position in the course of the CSR progress, from a rather narrow responsibility only for an environmental aspect to a wider responsibility for society, tended to have weaker trust in both science and the market.

　 National projects often would not stop, even when a failure is predicted. For example, the Ministry of Transport in Japan developed a new type of a high-speed ship "Techno-Super-Liner (TSL)" and the TSL development project was considered to be "successful" technically in trial voyage. Even though its high production and operation costs were pointed out from the start, the Ministry of Transport decided to use TSL commercially, and resulted in utter failure.
　 The author has investigated the case of TSL in detail in order to show the mechanism of this failure This paper has analyzed the background of the national project on TSL and the technical development of TSL in a technological research association. It also has shown the process towards commercialization and social and political background.
　 The author has shown the three factors of failure. Firstly there was no mechanism to consider commercial user's real need in R&D. Secondly there was no mechanism to stop or redirect the R&D, when it was found a mismatch between those who develop technology and those who use the technology. Thirdly R&D process was vulnerable to a political intervention if there was no definite goal of R&D before the project was started.

　 The aim of this study is to examine the structure and characteristics of the nuclear development in Japan, focusing on the lack of the governance in the nuclear safety regulation. New two models are proposed to explain an actual nuclear safety regulation process in Japan. One is "the pyramid model" with top-down method mainly conducted by Nuclear Safety Commission in conformity with the national policy. The other is "the reverse pyramid model" with top-down method promoted by electric power companies and nuclear reactor makers.
　 It is shown that "the reverse pyramid model" is much better model for explaining the real regulation process with lack of governance for each other in Japan, furthermore, the one-sided safety evaluation by electric power companies and reactor makers is inadequate condition for safety regulation under Nuclear Safety Commission which does not have the ability for the judgement with the original advanced knowledge, even if the process and transparency are properly maintained.