本稿は都市部飢饉としての北朝鮮飢饉の性格の解明の一環として,北朝鮮の政治経済システムの中核に位置する,首領経済が,人々の食糧の獲得能九すなわち,「食糧エンタイトルメント」にいかなる影響を及ぼしたかを論じた。北朝鮮における食糧配給システムは,首領とその一家を頂点とした差別的ヒエラルキー構造になっている。このようなエンタイトルメントのヒエラルキーを規定する物質的基礎は「首領経済」の形成にあった。

抄録全体を表示

The rights of foreigners, including their right to vote in local elections, are expanding in the European Union as the integration of Europe not only allows people to freely travel across the borders in the region but also has brought about the new legal concept of European citizenship.
Western Europe, however, has experienced an inflow and settlement of Asian and African immigrants and faces a serious problem concerning their social, economic and political rights. The purpose of this article is to explain the current status of the right of foreigners to vote in local elections in Western Europe and to generalize over the issue by comparing Western European countries with each other.
The current status of suffrage of foreigners in local elections in Western Europe will be briefly discussed. The countries which have granted foreigners the right to vote in local elections include Sweden, Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands. The remains of colonialism can be seen in the United Kingdom's approach to the issue, because the country has vested citizenship and suffrage to people from the Commonwealth of Nations. Ireland has also granted foreigners the right to vote, while the country decides whether it grants foreigners suffrage based on the historical relations between the United Kingdom and the countries the foreigners are from. The suffrage of foreigners has not yet been granted in France and Germany which have attracted many foreign workers, of whom Asian and African immigrants and Muslims account for a large percentage, although the issue has aroused much controversy in the two countries. These examples clearly indicate that the situations surrounding each country affect its approach to the issue of the right of foreigners to vote in a subtle way.
We will next examine a group of factors which enable countries to grant foreigners the right to vote and a group of factors which prevent them from doing so. The former group of factors includes the history of granting foreigners suffrage in a certain region, such as North Europe, a close relation between the former colonies and suzerains, the diplomatic policy of the country concerned (e. g. Sweden), free trade and the openness of the country. The latter group includes the ideology of a strong nation state (e. g. France), strong nationality (e. g. Germany), the ratio of foreigners to total population, a large cultural and religious distance between society which foreigners come from and society which accepts them (e. g. France and Germany) and the existence of a strong anti-foreigner movement.
Next, the logic behind granting the suffrage to foreigners and the logic against it will be discussed, and based on this discussion, the reasons why some countries have granted foreigners the right to vote and why others have not will be examined. The experiences in Western Europe could offer many suggestions to Japan which is facing the problem of whether to grant foreigners the right to vote in local elections. The problem of the suffrage of foreigners tends to be discussed at the level of norms, and there is little discussion on the matter from a positive point of view, such as how foreigners will be granted the right to vote and how heavy their turnout will be. Japan will be able to learn many things from experiences of Western Europe concerning this problem.

抄録全体を表示

It is worth noting that NGOs play growing roles on humanitarian/human rights issues. However, they are often in dilemmas both in donor-countries and in the fields by political situation. In this respect, North Korea is one of the outstanding cases in terms of humanitarian/human rights issues.
Since the mid 1990s, severe food shortage has stricken North Korea. But, most agencies are faced with difficulties in doing their operations. For example, NGOs sometimes get little support from the public by lack of transparency. One reason is that concerned parties such as governments and human rights groups oppose unconditional aid to North Korea. Another reason is that North Korean government restricts NGOs' activity inside the country.
Under these circumstances, this article attempts to address two questions. First, What are obstacles or dilemmas of NGOs on humanitarian/human rights issues to North Korea? And, second, how do NGOs try to overcome those dilemmas?
In answering these questions, I outline the overview and current situation of North Korea's crisis from the viewpoints of NGOs. In relation to NGOs' efforts, I focus on social networks, which often transcend sectors and national borders.
By looking at a framework of social networks, we may find how NGOs mobilize resources, and justify their activities. Moreover, we may observe the process of sharing values among different actors.
To examine these hypotheses, two NGO networks are chosen as case studies. The first network is specialized on relief and development issues. The second one is mainly focused on human rights and/or refugee issues.
In sum, through the cases on North Korea, this article attempts to examine the structural dilemmas of humanitarian actors, and to highlight the roles of NGO networks.

抄録全体を表示

There are people who criticize the modern system of nation-states since it is out of to uch with reality in the time of globalization. The majority of those people are Japan-born Korean citizens who are descendants of migrants from the former Japanese colony but have no Japanese nationality.
By asking to have voting rights for foreigners in municipal elections they are calling the notion of nation-states into question.
(1) definition of nationals:
Who should be regarded and included as nationals? Who should have rights and obligations in the nation-state?
(2) the principle that sovereignty resides in the nationals:
When nationals prevent foreign residents from having egual rights to theirs, nationality doesn't mean human rights but only privileges. Who can give it sufficient reason in the time of globalization?
In this paper I look back on the history of argument about social contract which foreign residents have made with Japan since the Japanese colonial era. I also compare it with Korean's another movement to refuse obtaining voting rights not to be ruled by Japanese nationalism.
Now many Japanese nationals think that foreign residents should be allowed to gain equal rights since they pay as much taxes as nationals. Japanese nationals also regard foreign residents as their companions after long living together. They realized that they had collaborative negotiation for long time already.
Through this argument I analyze the historical meaning of rights in Japan.

抄録全体を表示