本研究の目的は，エンゲル方式を用いて貧困基準を試算し，現行の生活保護基準額との比較検証を試みて，その有用性や課題を明らかにすることである。試算結果である，夫婦子ども３人世帯の生活扶助基準相当額は，14.0万円～23.2万円と幅のある結果となった。推計モデル［3］のみ低い水準を示したが，推計モデル［1］，［2］，［4］はおよそ同水準の結果を示しており，消費支出階級の選択よりも，勤労控除の取り扱いをどうするかが，生活扶助相当額を左右していた。絶対性を包含するエンゲル方式では，推計モデル，食料費の構成，生活扶助相当に含む内容など作業段階における判断の裁量によって貧困基準に幅が生じる。分析結果から，2009年時点において，相対的基準がエンゲル方式による絶対的基準を下回っていると結論づけるのは早計であると考えるが，絶対的基準が担保されているかを継続して検証することの必要性を看取できる。

This article examines how the Sato cabinet office defined its foreign policy linkages to Southeast Asia and the United States during Prime Minister Sato’s visit to Southeast Asia, Oceania, and the U. S. in 1967 by analyzing the policy planning of Sato’s brain trust group which is the so-called “Sato-operation” (or “S. Op.”). Previous studies have argued that Sato showed that pro-American stance in his foreign policy for Southeast Asia, supporting the U.S. Vietnam policy and, in return, making progress in negotiation about the reversion of Okinawa. On the other hand, this study demonstrates that S. Op. pursued its foreign policy for Southeast Asia which was different from Sato’s policy.

In May 1967, S. Op. recommended Sato the purpose of his visit to Southeast Asia and Oceania: gaining internal support for the Sato administration for overcoming the problem of extension of the Japan-U.S. security treaty in 1970. In this process, S. Op. showed their diplomatic vision, linking foreign policy to the political situation in Japan. S. Op. planned to manage the media campaign which contained Sato’s speech on the TV show and the briefing for the media about Sato’s trip.

However, S. Op. needed to reconsider their diplomatic concept due to Sato’s decision to visit South Vietnam which aimed at making progress in the negotiation of the reversion of Okinawa. Sato’s decision caused criticism of his trip by the opposition parties and the media. Fearing the failure of their diplomatic concept on this issue, S. Op. dealt with criticism for Sato’s trip with his speech on the TV show and planned Japan’s special envoy for North Vietnam. But, the official of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan opposed the plan of the special envoy, and S. Op. abandoned the project. Thus, the issue of Sato’s visit to South Vietnam clarified the policy differences between Sato and S. Op.

After Sato’s trip, S. Op. drafted Sato’s speech in the Diet, showing the connection between foreign policy for Southeast Asia and the U.S. Sato’s speech noted that ‘the international community’ looked forward to Japan’s role in global peace and prosperity. This speech showed that policy differences between Sato and S. Op. no longer exist. Therefore, S. Op. recognized that the diplomatic objectives of Sato and them could be compatible.

In conclusion, this paper shows that S. Op. pursued “double-linkage” between foreign and internal policy, Japan’s diplomacy for Southeast Asia and the U.S. Therefore, S. Op. was responsible for thinking about the Sato’s diplomacy in the cabinet office.