[ad_1]
While the government continues to refuse to explain the issue of the refusal to appoint members of the Japan Academy of Sciences, members Tomohiko Uyama and the Hokkaido University professor contributed to this document as an individual opinion on the team’s proposal of the PLD project in December.
◆ Private proposal with many strange points
The review of the academic conference scenario format is about to be done quickly. The Liberal Democratic Proposal is very urgent and has many strange points, but what is particularly strange is the model of the western academies and the misunderstood model in terms of the market, without specifically mentioning the current problems and the purpose of the reform. The purpose is to change the way of installation and increase the functions.
Tomohiko Uyama, Professor at Hokkaido University (provided by himself)
The functions of the National Academy include honoring outstanding scholars, allocating research funds and awards / scholarships, policy proposals, disseminating academic knowledge, international exchange and research itself, but the fields covered by the country. And how to put emphasis is different.
In the case of Japan, the honor is awarded by the academy, the funds are distributed by the Association for Academic Promotion, proposals to the government and society and international exchange are shared by the academic council, and the research itself is the territory of the university / research institution. It is a characteristic. This is a division that goes back to the prewar era when each predecessor existed, and it can be said that it was a rational choice that took advantage of the laggards to divide them without covering several functions in a single institution.
◆ If you become a private organization in Japan, you may become more dependent on the government.
Academic council members are fixed-term rather than life-long like members of academia in other countries, and they have steered clear of sterile struggles for honor and a monopoly of status. In selection, accumulating reforms, instead of “the logic of numbers” that prioritizes fields with a large number of researchers, we bring together members and collaborators from as many fields as possible and propose diverse knowledge and opinions. I have made it possible to reflect it. Such an academy should be proud to be a Japanese model.
The proposal of the Liberal Democratic Party emphasizes the “independence of the government” as a point to be imitated in the West, but does not touch the essence of the “independence” that the government restricts intervention in the academic world, only organizational and financial issues. It seems to be thinking.
Japan Academic Conference
However, many Western academies also have a basis for the establishment of national laws and decisions, and most of their financial resources come from public funds. Even so, it does not become a government agency and has the authority to make proposals to the government on an equal footing because there is a “public” space in Europe and the United States that is not monopolized by the state, and the academy is positioned there.
On the other hand, in Japan, there is a strong tendency to equate the public and the nation, and private organizations can have a strong influence across the country only for economic organizations with a history of financial power. If it becomes a quasi-governmental organization that receives detailed supervision from the government as an independent administrative agency, or if it becomes a private organization that relies on government funds, the subordination to the government will increase. Unless the public state of Europe and the United States is established in Japan, the decision of the Japanese government at the time of its establishment to convert an academic council representing the entire academic world of the country into a national institution is still present. It would be rational.
◆ Independent national institutions are essential for free democracy
In the turmoil since the denial of the appointment, there was a view that the academic council should listen to the government whenever it is a tax-funded institution, and it is natural for the prime minister to decide the staff. This is a very dangerous idea that affects topics other than academic conferences.
To prevent democracy from becoming a dictatorship by elected parties and politicians, state agencies that operate independently of the government, such as courts, prosecutors, and ombudsmen, supervise or specialize in government. It is necessary to give advice from a different point of view. If the head of government freely moved all the personnel matters of national civil servants, that independence would be lost and it would become a total institution.
In recent years, what happened in foreign countries such as Hungary, Poland and Turkey where the decline of free democracy has been pointed out was exactly the situation in which the government lost its power to monitor and advise the government from national institutions such as the courts, and the government got out of control. .. Political scholars around the world are reminded that the existence of a national institution that performs its functions independently is not the “contradiction” of the Liberal Democratic Party, but is essential to free democracy.
Of course, the academic conference is in a position to give advice and suggestions rather than monitor, and dialogue with the government is also important. In recent years, cooperation between academic councils and ministries and agencies has deepened on specific political issues related to science and society, but unfortunately the government often refuses to discuss general academic policy and the appointment of members. If the government refuses to speak, no matter how much the academic council itself is reformed, it is difficult to make a profound contribution to the policies required by the private sector proposal.
◆ The PLD uses the wisdom of “conservation”
Although not stated in the Liberal Democratic Recommendations, the reason for wanting to change the way the academic conference should be is that only a small part of the conference recommendations and statements conflict with government policies, such as the statement of 2017 on military security investigation. Probably because it contains something that appears to be done. In reality, the statement does not prohibit military research, it only says that universities and other institutions must create a detection system. If you still believe that the statement is misleading about the investigation to be conducted by the Defense Equipment Agency, you should explain and speak courteously at academic conferences and universities. Without that dialogue, trying to retaliate against the academic conference for the rejection of the appointment or the threat of organizational reform is not productive at all.
The academic council is the only institution where researchers can meet beyond the limits of universities and academic societies, pose their own problems and make proposals with legal legitimacy to the government and society. In addition to advocating for academic development and academic freedom, he has also contributed to education, health care, multicultural coexistence, etc. in cooperation with various stakeholders. Certainly, there are many points that need to be improved, such as the fact that the authority has been reduced over the years, which makes it difficult to make recommendations on important topics, and the advertising costs are low, so the activities do not they are widely known to the public.
However, these improvements do not require changes in the organizational structure. Isn’t the “conservation” wisdom that PLD should be, to emphasize improving content and performance rather than spending a huge amount of work and money on shape-changing reforms? To develop the relationship between politics and academia in a future-oriented way, it is important to deepen the dialogue, not to impose reforms.
