DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrated Innovation Strategy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrated Innovation Strategy provisional translation Integrated Innovation Strategy 1 Contents Introduction 3 (1) Positioning of the Fifth Basic Plan and Comprehensive Strategy 2017 ............... 3 (2) Evaluation of Current Status and Necessity of Integrated Innovation Strategies ....... 3 (3) New Strategy Formation Process and Structure ................................. 5 CHAPTER 1: General 6 (1) Status of the Action on the Fifth Basic Plan and Comprehensive Strategy 2017 ........ 6 (2) Global Trend ............................................................. 10 (3) Our Strength in the Context of Game-Changing Developments .................... 12 (4) Basic Concept of an Integrated Strategy ....................................... 14 (5) Future Issues ............................................................. 15 CHAPTER 2: Source of Knowledge 16 (1) Construction of the Cross-domain Exchange Platform towards the Society 5.0 Realization ........................................................................... 17 (2)Construction of Data Infrastructure for Open Science ............................ 22 (3) Evidence Based Policy Making/Promotion of University Corporation Management ... 28 CHAPTER 3: Knowledge Creation 31 (1) Creation of Innovation Ecosystem with University Reform and such ............... 34 (2) Strategic R&D (SIP, PRISM, ImPACT) ....................................... 46 CHAPTER 4: Social Implementation of Knowledge 50 (1) Startups ................................................................. 52 (2) Promotion of Innovation in the Government Projects/Systems .................... 57 CHAPTER 5: Global Deployment of Knowledge 63 (1) Promotion of Science, Technology and Innovation for Achieving SDGs (STI for SDGs) 66 CHAPTER 6: Major Fields to Be Enhanced 70 (1) AI Technology ............................................................ 72 (2) Biotechnology ............................................................. 81 (3)Environment and Energy ................................................... 87 (4) Safety and Security ........................................................ 92 (5) Agriculture ............................................................... 97 (6) Other Important Fields .................................................... 102 List of Abbreviations ......................................................... 106 2 Introduction (1) Positioning of the Fifth Basic Plan and Comprehensive Strategy 2017 The Fifth Science and Technology Basic Plan (Approved by the Cabinet in January 2016. Hereinafter referred to as “the Fifth Basic Plan”), based on the results and through issues for the 20 years after the First Sciences and Technology Basic Plan, making our country “The most innovation-friendly country in the world” was held up to be materialized as “Super Smart Society =Society 5.0”1（”Plan” in PDCA Cycle）. Regarding the adoption of the Fifth Basic Plan, the “Comprehensive Strategy on Science, Technology and Innovation 2017” (Approved by the Cabinet in June of 2017. Hereinafter referred to as “Comprehensive Strategy 2017”) states that in particular, the realization of "Society 5.0" and the steady implementation of the "Public-Private Investment Expansion Initiative of STI"2, are of great significance ("Do" in PDCA Practical Cycle). (2) Evaluation of Current Status and Necessity of Integrated Innovation Strategy Three years have passed since the formulating of the Fifth Basic Plan, and progress is being made in many domestic fields. Meanwhile, as an unprecedented disruptive innovation 3 is developing worldwide, it has been pointed of relative level down of STI innovative capability in Japan. While fundamental game changes4 such as knowledge merging, rapid advances of disruptive innovations, changing roles of entrepreneurship, e.g. the rapid expansion of so-called “platforms” and their advances into the real economy, the exposure to the battle for innovation supremacy, and the transgression towards a sustainable economy are occurring globally at all levels, the limitations of advancing science and technology innovation policies as an extension of past measures have been revealed. Japan is pressed to reconsider its entire socioeconomic system with its organizations, structures, enterprises conducts, customs, and ways of working that Japan has built up for so many years. At the same time, five and a half years after the adoption of the so-called Abenomics, initially, aiming at the sloughing off from deflation and the increase of wealth, the so- called "three arrows", a policy package consisting of monetary and fiscal policies, as well 1 In the Fifth Basic Plan, “provide the needed things・to persons needing things at the needed times as much as needed, thus being able to receive high-quality services by everyone overcoming such differences as age, gender, region, language and the society to be able to vividly and comfortably live” are intended and “the human-centered society to be able to for people to enjoy quality living full of vitality and comfort compatible with economic development by providing things and services, coping finely and attentively with a variety of needs and those of latent and dormant, cyberspace and physical space highly merged” in the Comprehensive Strategy 2017. 2 CAO, "Report of Socioeconomic and STI Vitalization Council"(December 2016) 3 "Disruptive Innovation" in “The Innovator’s Dilemma”（Written by Clayton M. Christensen, Audited by Shunpeita Tamada, Translated by Yumi Izuhara, 2001, Shoeisha） 4 Refer Chapter 1 (2) from 1 to 4 3 as a growth strategy, was carried out. In 2015, policies with the aim to realize a "Dynamic Engagement of All Citizens" were introduced ("The New Three Arrows"). At the end of 2017, policies such as the productivity revolution were compiled into the "New Economic Policy Package". Today, with the progress of structural changes, the improvement of the employment situation, and the revitalization of business activities, Japan's economy continuous to recover in many areas. However, switching our eyes to the future, our country's labor productivity ranked the lowest in G75, it shall be feared that the international competitiveness as seen in the sudden drop in various rankings. As the innovation including those of scientific technologies-induced would hold the key of growth of developed countries, improving these capabilities dramatically and increasing its productivity greatly is an urgent issue that needs to be tackled in order to ensure the sustainability of the Abenomics' actions. The Society 5.0 as proposed in the Fifth Basic Plan envisions a grand concept to build a human- centered society that through the utilization of STI will not only contribute to the increase in productivity, but whose significance will start to gain global attention in times of growing disparity divide and trends towards data-ism. In order to realize these plans in the context of a rapidly changing and ever evolving world, societal change towards a so-called "Next-Generation- type System of Balance"6 will be necessary. An alert, dynamic, active system that can quickly respond to change and always looks for an optimal solution has to be constructed (hereinafter referred to as the "Next-Generation-type System of Balance"). To make this possible, it needs a unified government with strong willpower, and an "Integrated policy package" that is capable of boldly changing the entire socioeconomic system. On that occasion, while boldly envisioning what might be important in the uncertain future, the key to create "the most innovation-friendly country in the world" lies in the fundamental reorganization of all the elements that sustained "the stability of our existing system" such as an excellent real economy, intellectual assets including technological seeds, universities and human resources, all in accordance with the world's changing environment. Therefore, in the FY of 2018, at the halfway point of the Fifth Basic Plan, in addition to confirming and evaluating the progress status of various measures ("Check" of the PDCA cycle) of the "Comprehensive Strategy 2017" and other actions, we will verify policies and socioeconomic systems 5 In 2016 Japan's labor productivity is 20th in OECD member countries and at the bottom in G7 countries (OECD Stat). 6 In his book authored by Masahiko Aoki “Toward Comparative Institutional Analysis (New Edition)” on Page 4 (Translated by Hirokazu Takizawa, Kazuhiro Taniguchi, 2003, NTT Publishing), “Rule by Rule of Game” the system is conceptualized by Douglas North's thinking by quotation and written “the most appropriate method is to conceptualize the system as equilibrium of game” 4 that are widely related with STI, and develop a "Integrated Innovation Strategy" (hereafter referred to as "Integrated Strategy7"), which will be carried out as the "Action" (Improvement) phase of the PDCA cycle. (3) New Strategy Formation Process and Structure Japan is a developed country that is facing many challenges 8 , e.g. declining birth rate, aging population, widening of regional disparities, mature economy, and stricter financial constraints. In order to achieve sustainable growth through innovation, the "design" of the strategy formation process and the implementation structure itself has to be reviewed and limited resources need to be utilized at maximum by shifting from an optimization model focusing on parts of the system to an optimization model targeting the entire system. For this purpose, firstly, after the government gets a better understanding of the entire domestic socioeconomic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Program for Promoting Japan As an Asian Business Center and Direct Investment Into Japan
    Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct Investment into Japan Office of FDI Promotion, Cabinet Office Program for Promoting Japan as an １ Asian Business Center and Direct Investment into Japan Growth of foreign direct investment to Japan In December 2011, the Government of Japan formulated the “Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct Investment into Japan” consisting of policy measures to create an attractive, world-class business and living environment. The “New Growth Strategy” (June 2010, Cabinet decision) and the “Interim Report on Strategies to Revitalize Japan” (August 2011, Cabinet decision) requested the Government to formulate this Program. The Program was determined by the Interagency Parliamentary Secretary Meeting chaired by Hiroshi Ogushi, Parliamentary Secretary of the Cabinet Office. ＜1st stage＞ ＜2nd stage＞ Doubling FDI stock Doubling FDI to GDP from 2001 to 2006 ratio to around 5% by 2010 ２ Three Targets of The Program The Program sets out three targets that are to be achieved by 2020. 1) To Increase the Number of High Value-Added Sites The aim is to increase the number of high value-added sites (Asia Regional Headquarters and research and development facilities) by 30 sites each year by attracting FDI. As of the end of FY2009, there were approximately 500 high value-added sites in Japan. 2) To Double the Number of Employees of Foreign Enterprises The aim is to increase the number of employees of foreign enterprises (defined as those which have more than one-third ratio of foreign ownership) to 2,000,000 by FY2020.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Administrative Organization in Japan
    Appendix 2 THE NATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION IN JAPAN 1. The Outline of National Administrative Organization National administration is uniformly carried out by the Cabinet and the organizations under the cabinet. The Cabinet, Ministries, Agencies and Incorporated Administrative Agencies (IAAs), etc. function as one organization, at the top of which exists the Cabinet. It is responsible for all the activities of State except legislative and judicial ones. Consequently it is natural that these organizations which take care of national administration should be systematically organized under the Cabinet. As of 2019, the Cabinet Office, 11 Ministries, and the Reconstruction Agency are under the Cabinet. They are national administrative organizations in the proper sense of terms. However, not all the areas of State activities are covered by these Ministries. Incorporated Administrative Agencies and Public Corporations also cover other parts of the activities. One of their purposes is accomplishing enough efficiency and effectiveness in their business with autonomy and legal personalities separated from State.To necessary extent, they are subject to various controls by their competent Ministers. The former, for which more general rules are prepared, amount 87 as of October 1, 2019. Some of them are regarded the same as government offices in terms of quality of their roles, to which are applied statutes concerned. Public Corporations, which now amount 33 as of the same date, are enterprises dealing with different quality business from IAAs. They must be regulated by individual acts of rules, not common rules, unlike IAAs. Thus we can see some types of organizations following policy process from planning to implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Japan's Space Policy Formulation: Structures, Roles and Strategies of Ministries and Agencies for Space
    A Guide to Japan’s Space Policy Formulation: Structures, Roles and Strategies of Ministries and Agencies for Space A Working Paper on Japan’s Space Policy By Takuya Wakimoto ISSUES & INSIGHTS WORKING PAPER VOL. 19, WP3 | APRIL 2019 Pacific Forum Based in Honolulu, the Pacific Forum (www.pacforum.org) is a foreign policy research institute focused on the Asia-Pacific Region. Founded in 1975, the Pacific Forum collaborates with a broad network of research institutes from around the Pacific Rim, drawing on Asian perspectives and disseminating project findings and recommendations to global leaders, governments, and members of the public throughout the region. The Forum’s programs encompass current and emerging political, security, economic, and maritime policy issues, and works to help stimulate cooperative policies through rigorous research, analyses and dialogues. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................ iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................ v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................... vi ENGLISH-JAPANESE TRANSLATIONS ...................................... vii 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................... 1 2. KEY GOVERNMENTAL ACTORS, POLICY DOCUMENTS AND MECHANISMS ........................................................................ 3 3. JAPAN’S SPACE POLICY OBJECTIVE ......................................... 23 4. CONCLUSION .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Securing Japan an Assessment of Japan´S Strategy for Space
    Full Report Securing Japan An assessment of Japan´s strategy for space Report: Title: “ESPI Report 74 - Securing Japan - Full Report” Published: July 2020 ISSN: 2218-0931 (print) • 2076-6688 (online) Editor and publisher: European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) Schwarzenbergplatz 6 • 1030 Vienna • Austria Phone: +43 1 718 11 18 -0 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: www.espi.or.at Rights reserved - No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose without permission from ESPI. Citations and extracts to be published by other means are subject to mentioning “ESPI Report 74 - Securing Japan - Full Report, July 2020. All rights reserved” and sample transmission to ESPI before publishing. ESPI is not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, product liability or otherwise) whether they may be direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential, resulting from the information contained in this publication. Design: copylot.at Cover page picture credit: European Space Agency (ESA) TABLE OF CONTENT 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background and rationales ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Objectives of the Study ................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Methodology
    [Show full text]
  • Satoshi Kogure, Co-Chair of Multi-GNSS Asia Director, National Space Policy Secretariat, Cabinet Office, the Government of Japan
    MULTI-GNSS ASIA Satoshi Kogure, Co-Chair of Multi-GNSS Asia Director, National Space Policy Secretariat, Cabinet Office, The Government of Japan Supported by: WHAT’S MGA? Multi-GNSS Asia (MGA) which promotes multi GNSS in the Asia and Oceania regions and encourages GNSS service providers and user communities to develop new applications and businesses. The MGA activities are reported annually in the ICG providers’ forum. The MGA also supports developing countries in achieving its SDGs through technical support on GNSS via seminars for policy makers and more. Aug. 2020 GISTDA Aug. 2019 GISTDA Oct. 2018 RMIT, FrontierSI, GA, GNSS,asia, QSS Oct. 2017 LAPAN, BELS, GNSS.asia, QSS, JAXA Nov. 2016 Univ. Philippines, NAMRIA, Phivolcs, BELS, GNSS.asia, QSS, JAXA Dec. 2015 Soartech, BELS, GNSS.asia, QSS, JAXA, SPAC Oct. 2014 NSTDA, G-NAVIS, QSS, JAXA, SPAC Dec. 2013 G-NAVIS, HUST, QSS, JAXA, SPAC Dec. 2012 ANGKASA, JAXA, G-NAVIS, SPAC Nov. 2011 GTC, KARI, JAXA, SPAC Nov. 2010 IGNSS, JAXA, SPAC https://www.multignss.asia https://www.multignss.asia/contact Jan. 2010 GISTDA, JAXA, SPAC https://www.facebook.com/multignss Conference and Exhibition What is MGA? To share the latest advancements to the GNSS and PNT landscape, the MGA conference is organized annually in a different location across the Asia- Oceania region. Delegates can also find out about new technologies, products and services, updates on R&D projects and achievements. The Pillars of conference attracts participants from industry, government and academia from around the world, making its networking opportunities second-to- none. Activity Networking and Capacity Building via Webinars, Workshops and Forums To make sure you’re on top of rapidly changing technological developments • Conference and Exhibition in GNSS, PNT technologies and its utilization in the business landscape, MGA hosts webinars, regional workshops and networking forums.
    [Show full text]
  • III. Emergency Responses Required and Taken by Governments and Other Bodies 1
    III. Emergency Responses Required and Taken by Governments and Other Bodies 1. Emergency Responses Mandated in the Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Act, the Basic Plan for Emergency Preparedness, etc. See Chapter III 1 of the Interim Report. 2. Government Response after the Accident (1) General description of the response of the national government1 Right after the earthquake struck at 14:46 on March 11, 2011, METI established the Emergency Response Headquarters for the disaster and began gathering information on the state of the reactors at nuclear power stations in the stricken areas. At the Prime Minister’s Office, at 14:50 the same day, Tetsuro Ito, the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary for Crisis Management (“Crisis Management Deputy Chief Ito”), established the Emergency Response Office in the Prime Minister’s Office for the earthquake, and summoned members of the Emergency Operations Team, which was made up of the bureau chiefs of relevant ministries, to the Prime Minister’s Office Crisis Management Center located below ground inside the Prime Minister’s Office. At around 15:42 the same day, Masao Yoshida, the site superintendent of the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station (hereinafter referred to as “Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS) (hereinafter referred to as “Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS Site Superintendent Yoshida”) of Tokyo Electric Power Company (hereinafter referred to as “TEPCO), sent an Article 10 Notification via the TEPCO head office to the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (“NISA”) and other competent bodies, having judged that,
    [Show full text]
  • KAKEHASHI Project Asian American Leadership Program Report
    Japan’s Friendship Ties Program (USA) KAKEHASHI Project Asian American Leadership Program Report １．Program Overview As part of the Exchange Program “KAKEHASHI Project,” 10 Asian Americans visited Japan. They stayed in Japan from October 2 to October 9 to participate in programs aimed at promoting their understanding of Japan with regard to Japanese politics, economy, society, culture, history, and foreign policy. Through the lectures by ministries observation of the historical landmarks, and other experiences of the traditional Japanese cultures, the participants enjoyed a wide range of opportunities to improve their understanding of Japan and shared their individual interests and experiences through SNS. To wrap up the whole program they exchanged opinion with MOFA officers on the contents to dedicate for the future program 【Participating Countries and Number of Participants】 United States of America：10 participants 【Prefectures Visited】 Tokyo, Hiroshima, Kyoto ２．Program Schedule Oct 2 (Sun.) 【Arrival】Arrival at Narita International Airport and Haneda Airport Oct 3 (Mon.) 【Orientation】 【Courtesy Call】Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Takei 【Lecture】Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau and North American Affairs Bureau 【Lecture】Cabinet Secretariat/Office of Policy Planning and Coordinator on Territory and Sovereignty Oct 4 (Tue.) 【Local Industry】Tsukiji Market 【Observation】Edo Tokyo Museum ＊Group A:【Lecture】Ministry of Justice/Japanese Regal System/Intellectual Property Law 【Lecture】Cabinet Office/Measures to the Aging Population of Japa ＊Group B:【Lecture 】Reconstruction Agency / Recovery for the Great East Earthquake 1 【Lecture】Cabinet Secretariat / Growth Strategy Oct.5 (Wed.) 【Observation】Diet Building 【Cutting-edge Technology】National Museum of Emerging Science 【Historical Landmark】Meiji Shrine Move to Hiroshima Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • Localizing Public Dispute Resolution in Japan: Lessons from Experiments with Deliberative Policy-Making By
    Localizing Public Dispute Resolution in Japan: Lessons from experiments with deliberative policy-making by Masahiro Matsuura Master in City Planning Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1998 B. Eng. Civil Engineering University of Tokyo, 1996 Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Urban and Regional Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology September 2006 © 2006 Masahiro Matsuura. All rights reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known or hereafter created. Signature of author: Dep artment of Urban Studies and Planning June 27, 2006 Certified by: Lawrence E. Susskind Ford Professor of Urban and Environmental Planning, Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: Frank Levy, Daniel Rose Professor of Urban Economics, Chair, Ph.D. Committee 2 Localizing Public Dispute Resolution in Japan: Lessons from experiments with deliberative policy-making by Masahiro Matsuura Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on August 11, 2006 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Urban and Regional Planning ABSTRACT Can consensus building processes, as practiced in the US, be used to resolve infrastructure disputes in Japan? Since the 1990s, proposals to construct highways, dams, ports and airports, railways, as well as to redevelop neighborhoods, have been opposed by a wide range of stakeholders. In response, there is a growing interest among Japanese practitioners in using consensus building processes, as practiced in the US, in order to resolve infrastructure disputes.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Operating Results for Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency Estimated at the End of the 3Rd Mid to Long-Term Objective Period
    Evaluation of Operating Results for Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency Estimated at the End of the 3rd Mid to Long-Term Objective Period August 2017 Prime Minister, Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications, Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Form 2-2-1 National Research and Development Agency Evaluation on mid to long-term objective period (Estimated evaluation) / Overview of the Evaluation 1. Items related to the evaluation Agency Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency FY for evaluation FY evaluation the 3rd mid to long-term objective period (including estimated performance in the final year) Mid to long-term objective period FY 2013-FY2017 2. Items related to the assessor The Competent Minister Prime Minister Incorporated jurisdiction dept. National Space Policy of the Cabinet Office Dept. and person in charge National Space Policy of the Cabinet Office, Counselor, Hidekazu Takakura Evaluation and inspection dept. Policy Evaluation Public Relations Division, Minister’s Secretariat Dept. and person in charge Policy Evaluation and Public Relations Division, Director, Hiroki Kawata The Competent Minister Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications Incorporated jurisdiction dept. Global ICT Strategy Bureau Dept. and person in charge Space Communications Policy Division, Director, Hisashi Onaga Evaluation and inspection dept. Policy Evaluation Public Relations Division, Minister's Secretariat Dept. and person in charge Policy Evaluation and Public Relations Division, Director, Shinya Hirano The Competent Minister Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Incorporated jurisdiction dept. Research and Development Bureau Dept. and person in charge Space Development and Utilization Division, Director, Hirota Tani Evaluation and inspection dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Japan's National Security Policy Infrastructure
    INTRODUCTION | i JAPAN’S NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY INFRASTRUCTURE CAN TOKYO MEET WASHINGTON’S EXPECTATION? Yuki Tatsumi November 2008 ii | JAPAN’S NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY INFRASTRUCTURE Copyright ©2008 The Henry L. Stimson Center ISBN: 0-9770023-9-X Photos by the Ministry of Defense in Japan and the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force Cover design by Rock Creek Creative. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written consent from The Henry L. Stimson Center. The Henry L. Stimson Center 1111 19th Street, NW 12th Floor Washington, DC 20036 phone: 202-223-5956 fax: 202-238-9604 www.stimson.org YUKI TATSUMI | iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms............................................................................................................ iv Preface ................................................................................................................ vi Acknowledgements............................................................................................ vii INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1: EVOLUTION OF JAPANESE NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY .............. 11 CHAPTER 2: CIVILIAN INSTITUTIONS ................................................................ 33 CHAPTER 3: UNIFORM INSTITUTIONS................................................................ 65 CHAPTER 4: THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY.................................................. 97 CHAPTER
    [Show full text]
  • I Organization Charts
    I ORGANIZATION CHARTS Notes 1. Only the major organs and units of each organization (ministry, commission or agency) are shown; divisions of bureaus and departments, and local branch offices at lower levels are omitted. (The names of such divisions appear in “II Organization and Functions of the Executive Branch”.) The councils of each organization are also omitted. They are listed in “III List of Councils”. 2. The lines indicate relationships between organs. double line (= ) chief organs of cach organization solid line (―) internal divisions and external organs broken line (---) local branch offices wavy line (～～～) auxiliary organs 3. The figures indicate the fixed number of personnel of each organization. 4. The figures in parentheses indicate the number of units. 5. The data in principle are as of December 1, 2013, except the figures with foot notes. -1- GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN [Legislative Branch] [Administrative Branch] [Judicial Branch] DIET CABINET COURTS House of Representatives Cabinet Office Supreme Court 1-7-1, Nagatacho, 4-2, Hayabusa-cho Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Reconstruction Agency * Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Tel. 03-3581-5111 Tel. 03-3264-8111 Ministry of Internal Affairs House of Councillors High Courts (8) and Communications 1-7-1, Nagatacho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo Ministry of Justice District Courts (50) Tel. 03-3581-3111 Judge Impeachment Court Ministry of Foreign Affairs Family Courts (50) Judge Indictment Committee Ministry of Finance Summary Courts (438) Ministry of Education, Committees for the National Diet Library (165) Culture, Sports,
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Conference Agenda
    THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN GERALD R. FORD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY, JAPAN ECONOMY PROGRAM, AND DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS In Collaboration with Japan Foundation, Center for Global Partnership Center for Japanese Studies, University of Michigan Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), Cabinet Office, Japan Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University International Economic Relations and Structural Change: Issues and Policy Options for Japan and the United States Pre-Conference Meeting of Authors Room 2760, Sam Wyly Hall University of Michigan, School of Business Administration Saturday, March 13, 2004 8:30-9:00 A.M. Continental Breakfast 9:00-9:30 A.M. Robert E. Baldwin, University of Wisconsin, “Failure of the WTO Ministerial Conference at Cancun: Reasons and Remedies” 9:30-10:00 A.M. Masayoshi Honma, University of Tokyo, “WTO Negotiations and Other Agricultural Trade Issues in Japan” 10:00-10:30 A.M. Thomas Prusa, Rutgers University, “The Globalization of AD” 10:30-10:45 A.M. Coffee Break 10:45-11:15 A.M. Keith Maskus, University of Colorado, “Intellectual Property Rights in Agriculture and the Interests of Asian-Pacific Economies” 11:15-11:45 A.M. Sadao Nagaoka, Hitotsubashi University, “‘Pro-patent’ Policy in Japan and International Technology Trade” 12:00-1:30 P.M. Lunch (Executive Residence Dining Room) 1:30-2:00 P.M. Ichiro Araki, Yokohama National University, and Tsuyoshi Kawase, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), “The Evolution of Japan’s Aggressive Legalism” 2:00-2:30 P.M. Drusilla K. Brown, Tufts University, Kozo Kiyota, Yokohama National University and University of Michigan, and Robert M.
    [Show full text]