To use this site, please disable the ad blocking feature and reload the page.
This website uses cookies to collect information about your visit for purposes such as showing you personalized ads and content, and analyzing our website traffic. By clicking “Accept all,” you will allow the use of these cookies.
Users accessing this site from EEA countries and UK are unable to view this site without your consent. We apologize for any inconvenience caused.
The Science Council of Japan (SCJ) should increase the transparency of its activities as long as it maintains the status of an organization that represents Japanese scientists and national funds are invested in its operations. This can be called an appropriate goal for reform.
The government has submitted to the Diet a bill that focuses on changing the SCJ from its current status as a “special organization of the state” to a special corporate entity.
The role of the SCJ is to contribute to the development of science and industry by providing recommendations and policy proposals to the government. However, it is hard to say that the council has so far made timely proposals.
Instead, the SCJ has opposed research on military-related technologies and has also put the brakes on certain research into technologies for civilian purposes on the grounds that they could be used for military aims.
In the past, a university that was commissioned by the government to conduct research on defense equipment was forced to withdraw from the project under opposing pressure from within the SCJ. Many have said that this old-fashioned way of thinking is one of the factors behind the decline in Japan’s research capabilities.
All major academic organizations in Europe and the United States are nongovernmental organizations. There is nothing unnatural about the SCJ becoming a corporate organization with less state involvement than a national university.
Regarding the method of selecting members, which has been a focal point of the reform, the bill says that the current practice of “appointment by the prime minister” would be replaced with a system in which the members are elected at the SCJ’s general meetings. At the same time, the SCJ would receive advice on selection policies from a new organization to be formed by scientists who are not SCJ members.
It has been said that the selection of SCJ members is opaque because the decisions are made through coordination among the existing members. It is appropriate to accept outside opinions.
To increase the transparency of its operations, the bill also specifies that the SCJ would have an auditor to oversee its operations and finances.
In addition, the bill requires the compilation of a mid-term plan and self-evaluation every six years and stipulates that an evaluation committee of experts to be established in the Cabinet Office would check whether the contents of the plan and evaluation are appropriate.
For the time being, the government intends to subsidize the SCJ with about ¥1 billion a year in operating expenses after it becomes a corporate entity. It is quite natural that the actual state of its operations would be inspected and its activities evaluated.
SCJ President Mamoru Mitsuishi issued a statement saying these moves were “regrettable,” as the reforms could undermine the autonomy of the council. Some have also claimed that academic freedom will be threatened by political intervention.
Changing the SCJ into a corporate entity does not restrict its activities. Such an accusation misses the point, given that a system would be established for the council to select its members on its own. If the SCJ is to reject all government involvement, it should choose a way to become a genuine private organization without government support.
