No.12
ISSN 0289-8721

゜ゞ p..LECol\rぶ�もInformation Bulletin of

The Union of National
゜
Economic
Associationsp
1,,◇
in Japan
初 s�゜

<

き

と
Cl'.l

�
/)

日本経済学会連合

1992

Correspondence to be addressed:
Secretariat of the Union of National Economic Associations in Japan,
c/o School of Commerce,
Waseda University,
Nishiwaseda 1-6-1,
Shinjuku-ku,
Tokyo 169-50, JapanCOPYRIGHT 1992 BY THE UNION OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC ASSOCIATIONS
Printed in Japan. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS INSTITUTE, INC. Tel. (03) 5273-0473
ISSN 0289-8721

Editorial Committee
Kazuo TAKADA, Hitotsubashi University
Heita KAWAKATSU, Waseda University
Masao KIKUCHI, Chiba University
Michihiro OHYAMA, Keio University
Takashi UCHINO, Gakushuin University
Koichi FURUKAWA, Tokyo Institute of Technology
Isao TOMITA, Yokohama Harbor Polytechnic College
Mitsuru WAKABAYASHI, Nagoya University
Kuniaki ISHINAZAKA, Komazawa University
Directors of the Union
PresidentMa�ao UNO, Waseda University
Masao HAMABAYASHI, Yachiyo International University
Takashi NEGISHI, The University of TokyoY oshiaki SHIMABUKURO, Aichi Gakuin University
Tornoji ICHINOSE, Ishinornaki Senshu University
Takashi FUJII, Nagoya University
Satoru TAKAYANAGI, University of Tsukuba
Yoshiyuki SEKIGUCHI, The University of Tokyo
Yasuo OKAMOTO, Aoyama Gakuin University
Seigo NAKAJIMA, Ferris University
Norio TAMAKI, Keio University
Yujiro HAYAMI, Aoyama Gakuin University

Secretary General
Ken-ichi ENATSU, Waseda University
AuditorToshiya HANA WA, Hitotsubashi University
Kyoichi FUTAGAMI, Waseda University
Emeritus
Shigeta TSURU, Hitotsubashi University
Yoichi ITAGAKI, Yachiyo International University
Takashi SHIRAISHI, Kyorin University

THE UNION OF NATIONAL ECONOMIC ASSOCIATIONSIN JAPAN
日本経済学会連合
The Union of National Economic Associations in Japan, established in 1950,
celebrated its 40th anniversary in 1990, as the sole nationwide federation of
associations of scholars and experts on economics, commerce, and businessadministration. In order to obtain membership an association is subject to an
examination of its academic work. As of 1991, the Union had a membership of
43 associations, as listed on pp. 49-63. Inclusion of one recent entrant to theUnion brings the total membership for 1992 to 44 associations (the name of thisnew member is given on p. 64).
The aims and objectives of the Union are to support the scholarly activities of
its member associations and to promote academic exchanges both among members
themselves, and between Japanese and academic societies overseas. The main
activities of the Union are: (1) the publication and distribution of academic material
concerning Japanese economics and papers presented by member scholars, (2) the
sending of members to overseas conferences, (3) the holding and supporting ofinternational conferences in Japan, (4) providing financial assistance to member
associations who invite foreign scholars to Japans, and (5) collecting informationon activities of member associations and the issuing of a news bulletin.
The Union published in 1974 KEIZAIGAKU NO DOKO (The Trend inJapanese Economics), based on a survey of economic studies undertaken in
postwar Japan. The Supplementary volume covering Japanese economic studies
after 1974 was published in 1982.
The Union and the International Economic Association (IBA) jointly held theFifth World Congress of the IBA in Tokyo from August 29 to September 3, 1978.
The Union joined the International Institute of Public Finance in holding theInstitute's 37th Congress at Tokyo in September 1981. The Union dispatched 20
member scholars to the Eighth World Congress of IEA held in India in 1986.
Most recently the Union successfully sponsored the IEA Tokyo Round Table
Conference on "Institutions in a New Dynamic Society" held between 15 and 17
September 1987.
The Union celebrated in 1980 the 30th anniversary of its founding bylaunching a variety·of activities, including the publication of The Information
Bulletin. From Vol. 1 to Vol. 11, editorial advice was given by Mrs. E.O.A.
Checkland in Cambridge, UK. We would like to take this opportunity to thankher most sincerely for her invaluable help over the years. Prof. Paul Snowden of
Waseda University has kindly agreed to take over the task.
Address: Secretariat of the Union, c/o School of Commerce, Waseda University,
Nishiwaseda 1-6-1, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-50, Japan

CONTENTS
Page
AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS SOCIETY OF JAPAN THE ·······························

1(Formerly: AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC SOCIETY OFJAPAN, THE)
FINANCE ASSOCIATION, JAPAN ....................................................................

7

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS THE JAPAN SOCIETY OF ······························

11

MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY THE ACADEMY OF.........................................

17

ORGANIZATIONAL SCIENCE, THE ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION FOR …………..

20

PORT ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION, JAPAN …………………………………………….

26

RISK MANAGEMENT SOCIETY, JAPAN …·…·….. ………………•• …...………...……

31

SOCIAL POLICY, THE SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF ………………………………

38

SOCIO-ECONOMIC HISTORY SOCIETY…•••• …………•• ……••…•• …•• …•••• …...…….

44

LIST OF MEMBER ASSOCIATIO NS……….. ……•• …•• •••••…•• …• …........ ……..……..

49

NEW MEMBERLOGISTICS SOCIETY, JAPAN64

THE AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS SOCIETY OF JAPAN
1. History and Outlook of the Society
The Agricultural Economics Society of Japan (AESJ) was founded on
November 19, 1924. The purpose of the Society is eloquently described in theprospectus as follows: "The Agricultural Economics Society of Japan aspires tostudy all problems related to agriculture and rural societies. Regardless of how
such problems are approached-from agricultural management, agricultural
policy, agricultural statistics, agricultural history or other theories or applications
regarding agricultural economics ―the Society has a sincere desire to accomplish
its purposes."
AESJ has steadily conducted its activities for 68 years since its foundation,and has published, on a quarterly basis, 64 volumes of The Journal of Rural
Economics.
The focal point of the Society's activities is the annual convention held at the
beginning of April every year. The convention lasts for two days. A symposium
on common issues is held on the first day, and on the second day individual
presentations are made by Society members.
The Society's board of directors chooses the symposium theme andnominates the chairperson, who then nominates several reporters andcommentators. For the individual presentations, every year sixty to eighty
reporters are grouped into five to seven concurrent sessions where they make theirpresentations, followed by question and answer sessions.
The society is made up of 1,200 members under a president and three vicepresidents (both with a tenure of two years), with a board of managing directors
and a board of trustees to manage the affairs of the Society.
AESJ has an award system under which it grants Academic Awards,
Incentive Awards, and Best Journal Article Awards.
2. The 21st International Conference of Agricultural Economists
In August 1991, the 21st International Conference of Agricultural
Economists (ICAE) was held in Japan as the most important event in the history of
AESJ. The conference, with a long history of 60 years, is held every three years
around the five continents, and the Tokyo conference was the first in East Asia.
The main theme of the Tokyo conference was Sustainable Agricultural
Development: The Role of International Cooperation, and eloquent presentation of
the outlook for agriculture and farm villages in the 21st century.
At the Society's annual convention in April 1987, the decision was made to1

hold the 21st ICAE in Japan. In December of the same year, the Japan organizing
committee was set up around AESJ in cooperation with related academic societies,
and the preparations for the ICAE commenced. In March 1989, it was approvedby the government that the ICAE would be jointly held by AESJ and the Science
Council of Japan.
The ICAE conference was held for 8 days from August 22 to 29, 1991, at
the Keio Plaza Hotel in Shinjuku, Tokyo and the adjoining Kogakuin University.
Including the pre-conference tour (2 courses) and post-conference tour (4courses), the conference lasted for a total of 18 days.
Registered attendance at the conference reached 1,588 from 61 countries andregions (732 from overseas, 856 from Japan), and if the 100 or so guests areincluded, total attendance exceeded 1,600, the highest attendance recorded in thehistory of the ICAE. It was nearly twice as much as the previous highest
attendance of 823 recorded at the 19th conference held in Malaga in Spain in 1985.
The conference started with an opening ceremony and commemorative
speech. A plenary session was held every day based on seven separate themes
closely related to the main theme, followed by invited speakers'sessions at twovenues to promote better understanding. Other contributed papers were presented
in the afternoon sessions. In the evening, group discussions were held in 32
halls, in addition to poster sessions, which had 135 entries.
A special session on agriculture in Japan was organized, at which
representatives of AESJ presented their reports. The session helped to deepen
understanding of agriculture and the structural characteristics of farm villages inJapan.
Part of the official events involved field trips along six routes in the environsof Tokyo on the first day of the conference, and overseas participants had thechance to come into contact with the realities of agriculture and farm villages inJapan. An AESJ convention was also held that day and 83 reports were
presented. The convention was officially positioned as an ICAE "country
meetmg.
Furthermore, mini symposiums were held in major regional cities during thepre- and post-conference tours, based on themes related to the characteristics of the
agriculture in each region. Through a variety of companion programs, overseas
participants were able to deepen their understanding of traditional Japanese culture
as well as agriculture and farm villages in Japan.
3. Major Topics Discussed in Recent Annual Symposiums
1990 Symposium
The symposium in 1990, entitled Rice Production in Asia and International

2

Markets, was held as a pre-conference symposium for the 21st ICAE. It was thefirst international symposium planned and held by AESJ. The problems of rice inAsia were chosen as the main theme for the symposium, taking into consideration
the hot discussions in GATT on agricultural trade.
Five speakers were invited from five major rice growing countries in Asia:
Japan, Korea, China, Thailand and Indonesia. They were all top experts on riceproblems in their own countries. The symposium focused upon the production ofrice, together with its price and distribution issues.
The symposium was co-chaired by Toshio MATSUDA (Tokyo Universityof Agriculture), Teizo HIGUCHI (Tsukuba University), and Akimi FUJIMOTO(Tokyo University of Agriculture). The opening speech by Isoshi KAJII (Tokyo
Institute of Agriculture and Technology; then the president of AESJ) was followedby an introduction by T. MATSUDA representing the chairpersons.
The first speaker was LIU Zhi-ren (the Center for Rural Development, theState Council, China), whose presentation on production and consumption of rice
in China was a valuable contribution to the research in this field, full of highly
valuable data. He discussed the trend in rice production and demand in China.
The topics that drew special attention of the audience were: the conversion of
paddy fields into non-farm uses under the policies toward industrialization;
consumers'preference for high-quality rice; and the use of rice as a feed grain.
The second topic was of a special interest, since it became an issue before Chinareaches the stage of rice self-sufficiency.
The comment by Keijuro NAGATA (Nagoya University) emphasized the
Asian way of rice-growing as an important viewpoint, and raised questions as topossible changes in cooperation among farmers in rice cultivation vis-a-vis theshift from cooperative farming to family farming.
The second speaker was Sri WIDODO (Gadjah Mada University,
Indonesia). He showed clearly the Indonesian process of attaining the policy goalof rice self-sufficiency, using two key words; the five-year plans in the past andthe green-revolution technology. He suggested that Indonesia was coming to facea decline in rice demand due to the declining trend in income elasticity for rice.
The comments made by Yoshitaka MASUDA (Obihiro University) were
centered around the changes in rice-price policy toward the protection of
consumers under self-sufficiency and its possible influences on domestic
production.
The third speaker, CHU Jong-Hang (Dong-Kuk University, Korea), firstoutlined the historical role of rice farming in Korea, and then expounded the recent
situation where the rice industry was facing industrial adjustment caused by rapid
economic growth. He pointed out that the critical situation the Korean riceeconomy is facing is essentially the same as in Japan. He also argued the political3

significance of the liberalization of rice imports from the viewpoint of national
security.
Based on the comparison of structures of rice economies between Japan and
Korea, Kenji CHO (Kyushu University), the commentator to the third speaker,
criticized the evolutionary understanding of Asian rice economies in which Japanis recognized as an advanced model.
The fourth speaker was Kanpole ADULA VIDRAYA (Kasessart University,
Thailand). He discussed the process of technological advances in Thai rice
farming, looking into the issues of yield instability, production inefficiency, andpoor efficiency in the rice distribution system due to inadequate market
infrastructure.
The commentator, Hiroshi TSUJII (Kyoto University) pointed out that the
problems that Thailand faces as the largest exporter of rice in the world stem inlarge part from its domestic rice policies.
The last speaker was Naraomi IMAMURA (The University of Tokyo), whotitled his presentation "Fundamental Problems Surrounding the Rice Economy inJapan," and pointed out various contradictions due to the Staple Food Control
System. He argued that the price of rice in Japan would inevitably move down
toward the market equilibrium level, should the critical situation in the present
production quota policy be taken into consideration.
The commentator, Toshiaki KITADE (Meiji University), insisted that what
is important in the rice adjustment policy is not to suppress its production, as
practiced at present, but the maintenance and development of its productive power
through higher utilization of paddy fields.
To conclude the symposium, the chairpersons stated that the major concerns
in Asian rice farming would shift from production-related issues, to demand­
related problems. They quoted a statement by LIU, the first speaker of thesymposium, that "many unexpected changes occurred in the consumption aspectsof rice economy."
1992 Symposium
The symposium in 1992 was on Institutional Reforms Required for theSurvival of Japanese Agriculture. It was chaired by Fumio EGAITSU (The
University of Tokyo). The choice of the theme reflected the critical situation
surrounding Japanese agriculture in the 1990s.
The chairperson summarized the causes of the critical situation as: (1) Lackof confidence in the future of domestic farming; (2) Out-of-date institutionalframework; and (3) Lack of social overhead capital in rural areas. He proposedthat these are the major obstacles which have been badly restricting the number ofyoung successors in Japanese agriculture. He then emphasized the necessity of4domestic institutional reforms in order to remove obstacles and restnct1ons.
In response to this proposal of institutional reforms, three speakers
presented their basic ideas on the directions of necessary changes with respect tothree major pillars of Japanese agriculture, i.e., the Farm Land System, the Staple
Food Control System, and the Land Improvement System, based on an analysis of
the present situation.
The first speaker, Takashi TAKEBE (Kyoto University), discussed the
problems of the present regulations on farmland, represented by the Farm Land
Act, in relation to the foreseeable development in the organizational forms ofagricultural operations. He specified six different types of organizational forms(legal entities), and explained how present regulations restrict their possibilities.
The commentator, Yoshio ITO (Shinshu University), tried to make clear thecharacteristics of each type of organization in relation to the farmland legislation.
The second speaker, Masahiro MATSUSHIMA (Osaka City University),
discussed the problems concerning the Staple Food Control System. He pointed
out; (1) the major concern of consumers now is not to reduce the level of the price
but how to stabilize its fluctuations, and (2) the idea that the producers'priceshould be determined to guarantee the production of rice by farmers is out-of-datesince the rice economy has been facing huge surpluses for quite a long time.
Shoji INUZUKA (Meijo University) commented on the concept presentedof how to determine the support price of rice, and then discussed the feasibility of
proposed reforms and the relationship between structural policy and·rice pricepolicy.
The third speaker, Nobuhiro TSUBOI (National Research Center for
Agriculture), discussed the reforms of the Land Improvement System. He pointed
out that the changes in agrarian structure, rural communities and civil engineering
technologies have brought about various difficulties in the implementation of land
improvement projects. According to his view, these changes undermined the Land
Improvement Act and drastic reforms in it are strongly needed in order to meet the
new needs under the new situation. He advanced his idea of instituting acomprehensive "Rural Infrastructure & Development Tax" and other new
machinery to take the place of outdated legislation.
In his comment, Tokuzo SAITO (Ehime University) expressed his support
for the basic view of the speaker, and then discussed in detail differences between"new machinery" and the old.
Finally, Hidesuke HINODE (Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, andFisheries) presented his opinions from the viewpoint of policy makers. He
appreciated the relevance of the focal points discussed in the symposium. Then,he expressed his doubt about the idea of an "agriculture-specific legal entity"
proposed by the first speaker. He supported the presentation by MATSUSHIMA,

5referring to several important points he found in it. He agreed with TSUBOI's
basic points on the reform of the Land Improvement System, but some of them, hepointed out, have already been attained through revisions made for the Land
Improvement Act in 1972, 84, 86 and 91.
1993 Symposium
The coming symposium in 1993 is planned to take up the issue of young
farmer successors, under the chairmanship of Yoshio ITO (Niigata University). It
is quite clear that this theme is closely related to the symposium in 1992. Lack ofyoung successors is the most serious factor which endangers the survival ofJapanese farming and rural communities, and calls definitely for drastic
institutional reforms.
4. Issues AESJ is Facing
As indicated by the 21st ICAE and the symposiums held at AESJ's recent
annual conventions, the following issues call for AESJ's serious academic
attention.
Firstly, how to solve the imbalance in supply and demand of food on a
global level in a world where hunger and satiation coexist.
Secondly, how agriculture should work as a symbiotic link between the
global environment and industrialized societies.
Thirdly, how to improve or solve inconsistencies in modem agr�culture toenable it to provide a continuous supply of ample food to later generations over along period of time. Here lies a real challenge for AESJ as well as for Japanese
agriculture which is, in a highly industrialized economy, on the verge of decline
and decay.
On the occasion of the 21st ICAE, AESJ instituted a policy of reestablishingitself as a legal body, further promoting international exchange of academic
research and making efforts to tackle more effectively the difficult issues
concerning food and agricultural problems that Japan and the world face.
(Naraomi IMAMURA, The University of Tokyo)(Fumio EGAITSU, The University of Tokyo)(Teizo HIGUCHI, Tsukuba University)

6

THE JAPANESE FINANCE ASSOCIATIONThe Japanese Finance Association was founded in 1977 to promoteacademic research in the field of corporate finance and financial management. The
initiative for the creation of the Association came partly from academic researchers
in business administration, partly from those in financial economics. From thetime of its foundation, providing a focal point for intellectual interactions between
researchers in academic institutions and those in business and governmental
institutions has been one of the primary objectives of the Association. The
Association has currently 460 individual members and 9 institutional members.
The main activities of the Association consist of holding annual meetingsand publishing annual collections of articles under the title Keiei Zaimu Kenkyu
Sosho (Corporation Finance Studies Series). Twelve volumes have already been
published in the series, and the two following volumes are going to be publishedby the first half of next year. The thirteenth volume, titled Gendai Keiei Zaimu no
Kouzou Bunseki (The Structure of Contemporary Finance), is in the process of
being edited at Kyoto University, and the fourteenth volume, titled Gendai Zaimu
Seisaku no Shintenkai (New Developments in Financial Policy) at Kyushu
University. Incidentally the tenth volume (1989) was titled Shihonshijo no Hatten
to Shisan Unyo (Development of Financial Markets and Corporate Financial
Property Transactions), the eleventh volume (1990) titled Kigyo Kinyu to Keiei
Mondai (Corporation Finance and Business Issues) and the twelfth vol皿e (1991)
Gendai Zaimuron no Choryu (Frontiers of the Modern Theory of Finance) .
Articles published in this series are subject to refereeing by members of the
Association. A lot of articles in the series are reports of presentations at annual
meetings.
Here are brief outlines of recent annual meetings. The 12th annual meeting
was held on the theme of Finance and Investment of Corporations at Kinki
University in 1988. The 13th annual meeting was held on the theme of The
Deregulation of the Financial Markets in Japan and Its Effects on Corporate
Finance, Theory and Practice, at Waseda University in 1989.
The 14th annual meeting composed a panel discussion on Kokusai Z紅mu to
Zaimu Kanri (International Finance and Financial Management of the Firm) at
Kyoto University in 1990, while a panel discussion at the 15th annual meeting
considered the theme Kaikei Disclosure Seisaku to Zaimu-Kaikei to Zaimu (ThePractice of Accounting Disclosure and Corporation Finance ―The Relation
between Accounting System and Finance Issues) at Kyushu University in 1991.
The 16th annual meeting took the form of a panel discussion on Shihonshijo
no Kakushin to Keieizaimu no Kadai (Innovation in Financial Markets and Issuesof Finance) at Rikkyo University in October 1992. A detailed report of this7

meeting will be published in the next Information Bulletin (1993).
The 17th annual meeting will be held at Aichi University in the autumn of
1993, and the 18th annual meeting is scheduled for Hitotsubashi University in thefollowing year. Their themes have not been decided yet.
The 15th annual meeting was held at Kyushu University on October 7 and 8
in 1991, with 175 participants. There were six sessions, at which 17 papers were
presented. In addition there was a panel discussion with four panelists. Abstractsof the papers presented to the regular sessions and the panel discussions wereprinted in Nippon Keiei Zaimu Kenkyu Gakkai Dai 15 Kai Zenkoku Taikai
Hokoku Yoshi (Summary of the 15th Annual Meeting of the Japan Finance
Association). The first session, chaired by Kiyoshi MIZUKOSHI (Bunkyo
Women's College), with comments by Michihiro IKOMA (Kinki University),
focused on the Relation of Corporation and Financial Firms. Reporters were as
follows: Akihiro KOYAMA (Gakushuin University), "On the Relationship of a
Firm to Banks-:-A Comparative Analysis of Germany and Japan"; Hiroshi
MARUYAMA (Yokohama Municipal University), "Bond Remedy by andIndenture Trustee as a Main Bank"; Tsuneo SAKAMOTO (Meiji University),"Growth, Profit of City Banks and Business Groups."
The second session, chaired by Rinya SHIBAKAWA (Hitotsubashi
University), with comments by Shinobu MURAMATSU (Seikei University), wascentered. on Mergers and Acquisitions and the Capital Market. Reporters were as
follows: ·Kyoko IKEGAMI (Kyushu University), "Financial and Accounting
Issued on the Late 1980's M&A in the USA"; Toru NAKAI (Okayama�ollege ofCommerce), "A Perspective of Acquisitions Strategies of Japanese Companies";
Ryozo SHIRAGANE (Kokushikan University), "M&A and the Market Based
Corporate Performance."
At the third session, chaired by Heizo URANO (Kitakyushu University),
with comments by Yoshio IIHARA (Nanzan University), papers on various
subjects were presented. Reporters were as follows: Hiroshi MIZUNO (Fukuoka
University), ℃ hoice among Dividends, Retained Earnings and External
Financing";.Kenji OTSUKA (Hiroshima Shudo University), "Japanese Corporate
Strategy --- A Simulation"; Soichiro MORIHIRA (Keio University), "Forward
Hedging Operation and Tax."
The fourth session, chaired by Shozo TAKAHASHI (Rikkyo University),
with comments by Hisashi MASAKI (Doshisha University), dealt with Structural
Financial Change in Current Japanese Firms. Reporters were as follows: Tokuji
MINOWA (Saitama University), "The Changes in Financial Structure of the Big
Business in Japan"; Shushin NARITA (Nihon University), "Chang邸andFeatures of the Financial Organizations of the Japanese Corporations"; Yasushi
HAMAMOTO (Osaka University of Economics), "The Change in Financial

8Structure in Japan's Business Enterprise."
The fifth session, chaired by Katsunosuke MOROI (Aoyarna Gakuin
University), with comments by Eisuke MORIZONO (Toyama University), had asits common theme International Finance and Financial Management Policy.
Reporters were as follows: Sumire YAMAGUCHI (Waseda University),"Valuation-Model-based Tests of International Equity Integration-A Review";
Yoshiro HATSUKADE (Yamanashi Prefectural Women's College), ℃urren
Changes and Management Control of Foreign Subsidiaries"; Mamoru AOYAMA(Yokohama National University), "The Issues of Global Index Funds."
The sixth session, chaired by Koichi FURUKAWA (Tokyo Institute ofTechnology), with comments by Junjiro MIYAMOTO (Kanto Gakuin University),
dealt with M&A. Reporters were: Tsuneo ONOZAKI (Obirin University), "A
Case Study on TOB in Japan-Gadelius", lkuo HARADA (Nihon University), "A
Review on Japanese M&A."
The theme for panel discussion, chaired by Shogo NAKAJIMA (Ferris
University) and Goichi KATAYAMA (Fukuoka University), with comments by
Jiro ASABA (Musashi University), focused on the Practice of Accounting
Disclosure and Corporation Finance --the Relation between Accounting Systemand Finance Issues. The panelists were as follows: Hidetoshi YAMAJI (Kobe
University), "The Modem Significance of Accounting Information Disclosure --­Economic Interests and the Social Ideal"; Sadayoshi MAEDA (Musashi
University), "Extension of Accounting Disclosure System and Business Finance";
Yasuo KAKURAI (Hosei University), "Bubble Economy and Accounting
disclosure"; Tsunehiro TSUMORI (Kyushu University), "Accounting·Disclosure
Policy and Corporation Finance."
Y AMAJI stressed that accounting information disclosure had always filled
the role of solving social economic problems or issues each time; he took up issues
in respect of regulation by decision making on railway fares and freight at the endof the last century and of the range of securities regulations in the 1930's in theUSA. MAEDA tried to analyze the relation between the development of theaccounting disclosure system and the Company Act in the United Kingdom. He
pointed out that the establishment of accounting standards had been set up to solve
the sense of social distrust against firms caused by the defects of the accounting
and financial system in M&A in the 1960's in the UK. KAKURAI tried to explain
the relationship between accounting disclosure and current issues on the
breakdown of the bubble economic situation in Japan. He emphasized theextension of the accounting disclosure system with segment statements, andpublicity of the current price of securities to prevent accounting manipulation.
TSUMORI explained the relation between accounting disclosure policies andpractical corporation finance, comparing it with accounting dividend stabilization，

policy in Germany, and the publicity of accounting information at certain phases in
the USA. He also referred theoretically to a change from a reporting function to a
publicity function in the accounting system. Finally. he tried to analyze thecomparative possibilities of Financial Statement E32 by IASC and its influence on
the Japanese accounting system.
The Chairman of the 15th annual meeting of the Association was Shozo
ICHIMURA (Kyushu University [till March 1992], Fukuoka University [fromApril 1992]), the secretariat was Masaru USHIYAMA (Kyushu University), andcouncil members were Akio MORI (President of the Association, Kobe
University), and Banri ASANUMA (the chairman of last year's meeting, Kyoto
University).
(Masaru USHIYAMA, Kyushu University)

10THE JAPAN SOCIETY OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICSI.
The Japan Society of International Economics was founded on April 29,
1950, with the aim of promoting theoretical, empirical and policy-oriented
academic research in International Economics. It has held general meetings
annually and published summaries of papers and the proceedings of its meetings in
its official bulletin, the International Economy. Beside general meetings, it has
sponsored local conferences held several times a year in the Kanto, Chubu andKansai Districts. The Society's membership covers both academic and businesseconomists interested in International Economics. It has about 1,200 individual
members and 22 supporting institutional members.
The general meeting is usually held for two days—one day is allocated to apanel discussion based upon the keynote papers and one day to free theme
sessions. The number of papers presented to the general meetings from 1950 to1992 is shown in Table 1, totaling up to 891. The keynote papers for panel
discussion are presented both from the so-called modem economics side and fromthe so-called Marxist side to stimulate discussion as well as to help form balanced
overall views on the issue. This may be regarded as one of the unique features of
the Society.
In order to give a brief summary of the Society's academic activity, let us
review what have been the main themes of the panel discussions.
During the 1950s, reflecting the reconstruction stage of the Japanese
economy, policy-oriented themes were taken up: What the Japanese Trade Policy
Should Be (1951,1), The Asian Economy and Japan (1953,2), Economic
Development and Foreign Trade (1956,2), The Japanese Economy and Trade(1957) and so on. Notable contributions during the decade were empiricalexaminations of the relationship between Japanese economic development and its
terms of trade by Kiyoshi KOJIMA (Hitotsubashi University) and Miyohei
SHINOHARA (Hitotsubashi University).
The start of the European Economic Community and its early progress led
the Society to focus on regional economic integration in relation to multilateral
trade liberalization. Thus the themes under panel discussion during the 1960s
were, for example, A New Development of the World Economy (1960), World
Trade on Turning Point (1964), Regionalism in Theory and Practice (1967).
Kiyoshi KOJIMA (Hitotsubashi University) delivered a pioneering paper entitled"A Pacific Free Trade Area Scheme Reconsidered". Among a number of papers
presented to the free theme sessions, it is worthwhile to mention Akira
TAKAYAMA's (International Christian University) "On Balanced Growth ofNurkse and Lewes" (1963) and Akihiro AMANO's (Kobe University)

11

"Determinants of Comparative Costs" (1963), both of which contributed to induce
young members of the Society to study the two by two mathematical trade model.
The world economy in the 1970s experienced some dramatic changes suchas the oil crisis, the shift away from the adjustable peg exchange system to a
flexible exchange system and others.The themes under panel discussion were, forexample, as follows: Reconstruction of the International Monetary System and its
Problems (1972), The Future of the International Monetary System and Today's
Floating Exchange System (1973), Confusion and Reorganization of the World
Economy (1974), and Crisis in the World Economy-Its Structure and Policy
Direction (1975). The keynote papers were presented, for example, by Yasuo
NORITAKE (Kobe University, 1972), Taro WATANABE (Osaka University,1973), Jun NISHIKAWA (Waseda University, 1974), and Giichi MIYAZAKI(Kyoto University, 1975). It should be mentioned that at the free theme session in1972 Michihiro OHYAMA (Keio University) presented the paper, "Trade andWelfare in General Equilibrium", which contained the now well-known Ohyama
theorem.
Until 1980 the Japanese economy expanded so rapidly that it became one of
the giants in the world economy. Japan was faced with new problems, clearly
exemplified by themes for panel discussion such as Japan's Economic Conflicts
with the United States and Europe (1981), Transformation and Outlook of theWorld Economy (1985), Internationalization and Business Activities (1987), andTechnological Innovation and the World Economy (1989). The main contributors
to panel discussions were, among others, Saburo OKITA (Representative forExternal Economic Affairs, 1981), Makoto IKEMA (Hitotsubashi University,1985), Kiyoshi IKEMOTO (Kobe University, 1987), and Masaru SAITO (Chuo
University, 1989).
Now Japan is the only one economic giant which has not yet attached itself
to a regional economic integration, intending to pursue a free trade policy within
the framework of the multilateral GATT system. But the recent rise of regionalism,
which is likely to endure and gain in strength, poses a threat to the multilateral
GATT system, and, thus, to the backbone of Japan's trade policy. Hence thethemes of Regionalism and the World Economy and Integration and Disintegrationof the World Economy were chosen for panel discussion both in 1990 and in 1992
respectively. In relation to these themes, the paper by Mikoto USUI (Tsukuba
University) presented at the free theme session in 1991 suggested a sensible wayof sustaining a multilateral cooperative regime.
(Makoto IKEMA, Hitotsubashi University )

12

11.

This part aims at pointing out main research areas and some interesting
papers in each area reported at the annual conferences of our society since 1987,
excepting papers on the modem economics approach.
The Plaza Agreement in 1985 was an epoch-making event in policy
coordinations among advanced countries which had already begun in the mid
1970's. At the same time, it revealed the retardation of the American economic
position in the world economy, and stimulated globalization of Japanese big
businesses on a full scale and revitalization of EC integration processes. In aword, it showed the emergence of a control system by three poles in the world
economy. The trend in this direction was accelerated especially by the collapse of
the socialist system in the late 1980's, and has appeared very clearly in the early
1990's. In Asia, foreign direct investments from NIES to ASEAN countries andChina since 1988 as well as Japanese direct investments to those countries havecontributed to establish a multilayered international economic structure among
Asian countries with Japan at the top of it.
The big dynamic changes as stated above in the second half of the 1980's
influenced the subjects of study of economists in our Society. First of all, it
should be noted that the majority of them were engaged in not pure theoreticalissues but empirical research works.
Main subjects and their representative reports are as follows. (Figures inparentheses indicate the published year of the Society's bulletin and pages
respectively.)I) As to multinational corporations (MNCs), studies concerning new forms
of international investment, stressing the significance of foreign investments
without stock ownership, which were first investigated by C. OMAN(OECD) in
his book New Forms of International Investment in Developing Countries in
1984, include a report by Shirah TAKEDA (Yokohama National University,
1988, pp.5-18), who puts the focus on international strategic alliances among
MNCs, arguing it as the international division of labour between intra-relating
firms which operate international intra-firm division of labour. The mostimportant contributions in his study are in his analyses of the transactions of intra­
relating firms (not intra-firm) and forms of international strategic alliances among
MNCs. Researches for finding out the structure and development of realinternational intra-firm division of labour and trade network of Japanese MNCs
were done concretely in the case of the automobile industry by Tadahiro TAKENO(Tokyo Metropolitan Technical College, 1989, 137-42 and 1991, 135-7) and in
the case of the electrical-electronics industry by Yoshihiro OHISHI (Saga
University, 1989, 143-7). They contribute in recording MNCs' networks in
products and production processes at company levels in case of Japan.
13II) As to foreign direct investments, Sadao FUJIWARA (Yamaguchi
University, 1989, 259-63) analyzes and raises some questions about the foreign
direct investment policies of the Japanese government after his critical review ofher policies since the 1950s. The development of global activity of Japanese
MNCs has attracted the attention of many economists, including foreign
researchers, to Japanese management systems like lifetime employment, strong
union-management cooperation etc. and their transferability. On this problem,
Hiroshi ITAGAKI (Saitama University, 1988, 297-302) analyzes the situation insome corporations in the automobile, electrical, semi-conductor industries in the
U.S. using the concepts of "application" and "adaptation". This report consists ofpart of a field work project organized by Tetsuo ABO (Tokyo University). A
report on this project was published as T. ABO (ed.) Production of JapaneseCompanies in Ameri�a (in Japanese, 1988, 132-72) Tokyo, 1988. Also Shoichi
YAMASHITA (Hiroshima University) checked the acceptability of Japanesemanagement systems in Thailand using his own original questionnaire. Bothreports are important as pilot studies. Katsumi SHIMADA (Kyoto Gakuen
University, 1988, 186-91) examines the implication of longer-time contract
transactions between firms in Japan on the basis of Fair Trade Commission data.
The study of such transactions has recently become important in comparison to US
companies's behaviour.
皿） Analyses on NIES countries have been done by many members during
this period. Reports on the Korean economy are flourishing. TRAN Van Tho(Obirin University, 1989, 223-7) analyzes the process of development of asynthetic fiber industry in relation to the introduction of foreign capital andtechnology, and finds out that indigenous companies have taken the place of
foreign dominance in its upstream. This is a valuable study. Though manystudies on the Korean economy pay attention to the bright side of her economic
development, 11 PARK (Osaka City University, 1989, 117-20) deals with the roleand policies of importation of foreign capital in 1960s-70s with an eye on thenegative side of her development processes. It is noteworthy that many Korean
economists contribute in this field. As to the Taiwan economy Shoh Gen TO(Nagoya University, 1988, 109-22) has done interesting research on her market
structure and the position of big companies using his own original data. As ananalysis of her inner economic structure this paper is highly appreciated.
N) The new international division of labour (NIDL) hypothesis waspresented in a book, The New International Division of Labour, Cambridge Univ.
1980 by German economists, F. FROBEL, J. HEINRICHS, 0. KREYE basedon the nature of the following three conditions in the contemporary world
economy: the existence of affluent potential work forces in the world, the14development of technology and labour organization which make the division of
production processes possible, and thirdly the freeing of the location of production
and control of companies from geographical restraints as the result of technologicaldevelopments in the fields of transportation, communication and information
systems. According to this theory, these newly emerged situations are thepresupposition for industrialization in the developing countries. From the point of
this view Tetsuya KOBAYASHI (1988, 96-102) discusses the conditions in thecase of the Asian NIES rather theoretically, and Kiriro MORITA (The Universityof Tokyo, 1988, 199-203) discusses the influence on female labour forces.
V) A most impressive study on EC integration is achieved by Sokoh
TANAKA (Tohoku University, 1987, 50-62 and 1991, 33-42). He analyses the
economic structure in the EC and its development in relation to the historicalchanges of the world economy; he also stresses the trend from economic
integration to a monetary, political one in the late 1990s as the inevitable road forprosperity in European countries. Kazuhisa OKUMURA (Hiroshima University,
1989, 121-6) makes clear the existence of a multi-layered structure of national
economies among the EC countries, using statistical data on foreign trade whichwere processed by himself. . It is necessary to add here that there are keen debateson the probability of block discrimination against non-member countries in thecases of the EC and NAFTA.
VI) How to understand the nature of economic conflicts between Japan andthe US is one of the biggest problems. It is necessary to put the antagonistic
aspects and the cooperative ones in their right places. There is a strong stream ofarguments which stresses the trend to strengthen these ties in the future. Minoru
SEKISHITA (Ritsumeikan University, 1991, 20-9) considers the trade conflicts intheir nature and their solution processes, referring even to the political negotiationsof both countries. Fumitake MATSUMURA (Osaka University of Economics,
1988, 310-6) sheds light to a kind of coordination between the two countries byfinding out a complementary structure by Japanese official and private finance for
the US balance of payment deficits since the 1970s, based on systematicallyprocessed time-series balance of payment statistics data of the US.

(Shoshichi SUGIMOTO, Kyoto University)

15

Table 1. Number of Papers Presented to General Meetings of The Japan Society ofInternational Economics: 1950 - 92.

Year1950, 1
1950, 2
1951,1
1951, 2
1952, 1
1952, 2
1953,1
1953,2
1954, 1
1954,2
1955,1
1955,2
1956,1
1956,2
1957,1
1957,2
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967

Number of Papers
Presented toFree Theme
Panel
Sessions
Discussion
4
8
11
7
7
4
5
3
6
7
5
5
5
6
7
7
5
6
8

，，
，
，，
，

8

2
7
4
4
4
11
4
5
6
6
5
5
5
5
6
11
7
6
6
5
6
7
6
6

Year

1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
Total

16

Number of Papers
Presented toFree Theme
Panel
Sessions
Discussion

，

5
6
12
12
8
8
12
6
14
15
16
24
18
18
21
17
30
21
42
33
31
31
39
24
650

6
6
6
5
3
4
4
4
7
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
4
4
3
4
3
3
3
5
241

THE ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY
1. History and Outlook of the Academy
The Academy of Management Philosophy was started with members'
unanimous support at the First National Conference held in September, 1984 as an
outgrowth of a former organization named the Management Philosophy ResearchCommittee established in April of the same year. The mission for founding thisacademic association rested on contributing to the establishment of a new set ofprinciples for corporate behavior based on a comprehensive approach thatincorporates not only an economic or economically biased emphasis, but also thesignificance of human dignity, human life, living environment, and social
environment as its integral components. Our Academy invites members not only
from Japanese academic circles and the business world, but also from overseas
countries for the purpose of exploring the depth of new corporate philosophiesfrom an international point of view. Presently, about 280 people are registered as
members for our Academy, and maintain well-knit network relationships andcreative research activities among themselves.
The historical changes that have taken place since the end of the 1980's
across the world are now pressing us to renew our traditional system of values,
standard of conduct and conceptual framework, at a far higher speed than had been
expected. Under these turbulent world conditions of such historical significance,
it has become vitally important to make an effort for laying a sound and dynamic
foundation from a long-term and holistic point of view, so that we can contributeto the stability and mutual prosperity among nations, and to the construction ofsociety and human life with feelings of latitude, affluence and worthwhile living.
To achieve the above goals, the following three issues seen to b the most urgent
tasks to be tackled: (1) designing the new world order and establishing a new setof world rules, (2) developing new political-social systems which enable thepractical design of national level innovations based on a set of roles and orders
with fairness, validity, and universality at local as well as global settings, andfinally, (3) creating a new corporate image and the standard of conduct for the newstage of business activities.
2. The 9th National Conference
The 1992 National Conference at Senshu University was devoted primarily
to the main theme: Creation and Practice in Neo Management Philosophy.
Regarding this theme, Haruo MURATA (Musashi University), Tatsuji SUZUKI(Niigata University), Tadao KAGONO (Kobe University) and Toshinobu

17

KITANO (Aichi Gakuin University) presented their main topics. The guest
speaker Ryuzaburo KAKU (President of Canon) discussed the importance ofcorporate ethics from the manager's point of view. After the "Bubble Economy,"
ethics issues in Japanese companies are becoming more pronounced. Therefore,
the necessity to discuss these corporate ethics was emphasized. Other
presentations were also given by eminent speakers in their related fields.
President KAKU said the following on the globalization of the economy andthe role of enterprises:"The ideology that only Japan should prosper, as in the past, will notacquire Japan any prosperity. But instead, it will lead to an isolation of Japan
from the rest of the world, and eventually, even to the collapse of Japan.
Consequently, the ideology of Japan should have been collaboration with the restof the world. However, this has not been the case. Politicians and bureaucrats
placed their concerns on individual interests and national interests, and were able
to deal with such affairs. However, they simply could not handle the realization ofuniversal values at the international level. If we are to recognize these facts, thenwe cannot but conclude that the collaboration of Japan with the rest of the world
through the globalization of the economy, must be realized by the enterprises, andnot by the politicians and bureaucrats. This is also supported by the fact that theenterprises already have global networks. They wish for their own individualinterests, but also at the same time, they are the ones who wish most for therealization of universal values at the international level."In other words, free trade and collaboration by Japan with the rest of theworld is the enterprises of today most desire. Accordingly, if the enterprises makemanagement ethics and philosophy inherent to themselves, we can think of themas originators and integrators who have successfully achieved the coexistence ofindividual interests and universal values at the international level. The importanceof the management ethics and philosophy is being recognized a new through thereflection of the bubble economy. And today, it is closely tied to the collaborationof the human race through the globalization of the economy.
3. Activities in the Academy of Management Philosophy
It is necessary to design a new paradigm by questioning ourselves as to theway corporations respond to the emerging realities and their future, ways ofmanagerial thinking, and the corporate structure and its functions. Our academic
association hopes to·see proactive managerial behavior prevail for reachingpositive ad fundamental solutions of contemporary problems, based on a newparadigm for accelerating changes and for creating and also for rearranging thestructure of our environment, rather than for reaching passive solutions or a mere18

treatment of symptoms by relying mostly upon the established paradigm and theprescribed behavioral patterns for adjustment to change. It is expected thatvaluable contributions will be derived form the activities of our Academy members
who seek to meet the challenges for creating new corporate philosophies and theirimplementation.
For further information, please contact the following address:
Professor Mamoru SANO
President
The Academy of Management Philosophy
Aichi Gakuin University
School of Business Administration
12 Araike, Iwasaki, Nisshin-cho
Aichi-ken 470 -1(Mitsuru WAKABAYASHI, Nagoya University)

19THE ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL SCIENCEThe Academic Association for Organizational Science was founded byProfessor Keiji BABA in 1959. He thought that multilateral inquiry into
organizations should be one of the most important tasks in social science. He
regarded this organizational study, "organizational science," as a micro foundation
in social science. The association was intended to foster interdisciplinary studies
of organizations based on his conception. The members' disciplines were various,
such as management, economics, law, politics, public administration, sociology,
psychology, behavioral science, engineering. This interdisciplinary characteristicof the association has been maintained from its start until today.
Professor Susumu TAKAMIYA became the second president of theassociation in 1963 after Professor BABA passed away. President T AKAMIYA
expanded the activities of the association both in quality and quantity based on thefounding philosophy and established the basic skeleton of the association. Today,
one of the association's two major activities is its annual meeting and- the other isthe issue of a journal, Organizational Science.
The annual meeting has been held every autumn since 1966; at each one a
specific common theme is focused on. Additionally, a seminar meeting has been
held every spring since 1972 at which research presentations are made on various
topics.
The common themes at the annual meetings clearly reflect the majorinterests of our association at that time. The themes and the universities where theannual meetings have been held are as follows.
Development of the Theory of Corporate Organizations, Sophia University, 1965
Organization Theory in Highly Industrialized Society, Sophia University, 1966
Organization and Innovation, University of Tokyo, 1967
Modem Organization and Bureaucracy, St. Paul's University, 1968
Power in Organization, Sophia University, 1969
Flexible Organization and Social Flexibility, Gakushuin University, 1970
Organization and Environment, Kyoto University, 1971
Organization and Leadership, Sophia University, 1972
New Development of Organizational Theory, St. Paul's University, 1973
Change and Revolution in Organizations, Toyo University, 1974
Behavioral Approach to Organization Theory, Kobe University, 1975
International Comparison of Organizations, Keio University, 1976
Environmental Change and Organizations, Takushoku University, 1977
Prospects of Future Organizations, Hitotsubashi University, 197820

Problems and Method of Organizational Study, University of Tokyo, 1979
Comparative Study of Various Organizations, Nihon University, 1980
Frontiers in Organizational Science, Waseda University, 1981
Japanese Organizations, Hosei University, 1982
Emerging Problems in Japanese Management, Meiji University, 1983
Creativity and Innovation in Organizations, Gakushuin University, 1984
Environmental Change and Self-Organizing, St. Paul's University, 1985
Changing Power-Relationships in Highly Industrialized Society, Keio University,
1986
Organizing in Contemporary Society, Kyushu University, 1987
Entrepreneurship: Main Motives of Organizational Creativity, Hitotsubashi
University, 1988
Information Technology and Organization, University of Tokyo, 1989
Value and Organization at a Turning Point, Kyoto University, 1990
Globalization: Its Impacts on Organization and Management, Waseda University,
1991
Reexamination of Organizations and Institutions in Japan, Kobe University, 1992
These themes can be broadly classified into five categories: (1) the
methodology of organizational science, (2) the organizational response to changing
environment, (3) the relationships between organizational behavior andendogenous factors (bureaucracy, power, leadership, entrepreneurship), (4) the
dynamism of organizations (innovation, creativity, self-renewal), (5) international
comparison and Japanese management. Although similar themes have repeatedly
appeared, research on them has been spirally advanced in the sense that thediscussions at the meeting have reflected environmental change as well as previous
research.
For example, two recent meetings, the-1988 Annual Meeting and the 1991
Annual Meeting, were held as follows.
The theme in 1988 was Entrepreneurship: Main Motives of Organizational
Creativity. The following seven papers were presented at the meeting.
(1) "Sequential Definition of Entrepreneurship" by Seiichiro YONEKURA(Hitotsubashi University)(2) "The Process of Autonomy and Movements in Inner-Living Type Religions"by Shigeru NISHIYAMA (Toyo University)(3) "The Process of New Business Establishment and Entrepreneurial Functions"by Eiji OGAWA (Nagoya University)(4) "Entrepreneurship in Middle Sized Corporations" by Shuichiro NAKAMURA(Senshu University)(5) "Entrepreneurship in Business History" by Keiichiro NAKAGAWA (Aoyama
Gakuin University)21

(6) "The Conditions of Entrepreneurial Behavior in Retail Corporations" by Junzo
ISHII (Doshisha University)(7) "Organization Theories of Information and Knowledge Creation: theOrganizational Process of Innovation" by Ikujiro NONAKA (Hitotsubashi

umvers1ty)·

Professor NAKAGAWA and Professor YONEKURA discussed themeanings and definition of entrepreneurship from the theoretical and historical
viewpoints. Professor NAKAMURA and Professor OGAWA reported onentrepreneurship in innovative corporations. An interesting presentation on theinnovative process was given by Professor NONAKA. He emphasized theimportance of the functions of information and the self-organizing processes tomake an organization innovative.
A symposium chaired by Hiroyuki ITAMI (Hitotsubashi University) was
given at the final session of the meeting. Tadashi MITO (Chukyo University),
Kenichi IMAI (Hitotsubashi University), Kenjiro USHIODA (President, Toyo
Sash Co.) and Michiyuki UENOHARA (Vice President, Nippon Electric Co.)
contributed their thoughts and ideas about entrepreneurship in Japan. After avigorous discussion, the following conclusions emerged. First, one of theentrepreneur's important functions is to enhance employees'potential abilities andgive them ideals at which they can aim. Second, the innovative process(entrepreneurship) is a dynamic process. Third, the essential element inentrepreneurship is information. Fourth, the age of individual innovation has
passed, and the age of collective innovation has arrived. Japanese management
systems are well suited to this collective innovation.
The theme in 1991 was Globalization: Its Impacts on Organization andManagement. The rapid and extensive globalization in both economic and politicalactivities has had considerable effect on organizations and management. The
following six papers which discussed the issue from the international and/orJapanese perspectives were presented at the meeting.
(1) "Leadership of Japanese Managers and Formalization of Organizations" by
Tetsuo AMAKO (Yokohama National University)(2) "Personnel Management in Japanese Companies in Britain" by Malcolm
TREVOR (Nagoya City University)(3) "Japanese Business in a Global Context" by Ken-ichi ENATSU (Waseda
University)(4) "Managing the Global Knowledge Creation Process" Ikujiro NONAKA(Hitotsubashi University)(5)℃onfucian Capitalism and Contemporary Business Management" by Hiroshi
HAZAMA (Waseda University)(6) "Toward a Dynamic Principle of Organization" Katsunori HIRATA (Osaka
22

Kogyo Bank).
Additionally, a special lecture entitled "International Approach to Global
Environment Problems" was given by Yoichi KAYA (University of Tokyo). A
symposium on "The Formation of International Rules" chaired by Tadao
KAGONO (Kobe University) was one of the most stimulating sessions at themeeting. Three panelists gave different cases of formation of international rules.
Masayuki TADOKORO (Himeji Dokkyo University) explained the negotiation
process of the Bank for International Settleme.nts (BIS) regulation. Tsuneo
SOGAWA (Waseda University) presented on the international diffusion process of
Judo. Jun-ichi TAKAHASHI (Obirin University) proposed organizational
problems in the international regulation of whaling.
Afterward, the common conditions and problems on the formation processof international rules were discussed and tentative conclusions were proposed.
First, the membership is closely related to the decision process. Homogeneous
members such as a particular specialist group make a rational decision while thedecision process of diverse members is political. Second, locality as well asuniversality is an important factor for making a rule fascinating for many people.
The Association's second major activity is the issue of its academic
journal, Organizational Science. The first volume was published in 1967 and it
has been published quarterly since 1968. Organizational Science aims to be asynthetic theoretical journal in the social sciences. The editorial board have laidstress on the interdisciplinary approach in order to inquire into modem
organizations as open systems in the economic and social environment.
Each issue consists of two parts. In the first part, several papers focus on
the same specific theme of each issue. Most authors are members of the
Association, but non-members including foreign researchers have also contributed
their papers. In the second part, a few papers on free topics appear. These papers
are selected through a refereeing system from papers submitted by relatively
young members.
The themes focused on in the first part of each issue can be classified asfollows.
(1) Organizational Problems in Modem Society: estrangement and participation,organization and economic system, social change and organizational change,organizing in contemporary society, changing power-relationships in highly
industrialized society, value and organization at the turning point, stockholders inmodem business, natural disasters and organizational prevention, etc.
(2) Basic Tasks for Organization Theory: goal formation in organizations, decision
making, communication, leadership, power, reexamination of the bureaucraticsystem, effectiveness of organizations, etc.
23

(3) Dynamis m of Organizations: flexible organization, self-renewal oforganization, creativity and innovation in organization, transition management,
crisis management, organizational revolution and organizational learning, etc.
(4) Problems of Corporate Organizations: modern corporations, social
responsibility, participation in management, corporate strategy, strategicorganizations, effect of technological innovation and information technology,
superfluous managerial personnel, etc.
(5) Non-Profit Organizations: efficiency of administrative organization, problems
in public organizations, organization of local government, etc.
(6) Japanese Organizations: Japanese management, future of Japaneseorganizations, some development of "Japan Model," etc.
(7) International Comparison of Organizations and Internationalization:international organizations, globalization and organizations, international
comparison of organizations, Japanese management in overseas countries, etc.
(8) Research Methodology of Organizational Science: the works of C. I. Barnard,
leadership theory, motivation theory, organizational psychology, behavioral
approach to organization theory, system theory, contingency theory, network
theory, self-organizing, cognitive theory of organization, etc.
In addition to those two major activities, the association has three minor
activities. The first of them is the monthly seminar held in Tokyo. Normally,
about twenty members discuss a presentation at this seminar. Presenters are not
only members but also non-members including foreign researchers. For example,
Professor 0. E. WILLIAMSON (University of California at Berkeley) andProfessor D. J. TEECE (University of California at Berkeley) contributed papers
at the seminar held in March, 1992. Similar seminars are also held by three local
branches: the Kansai Branch, Kyushu Branch, and Chubu Branch.
The second activity is financial support for research workshops, five toseven of which take place every year. This system encourages joint research
projects by members, although funds are not large. The research workshops in1992 were as follows.
(1) Discontinuous Change of Product Technology and Paradigm Innovation inHigh Technology Industries(2) Theory and Practice of Strategic Alliance(3) Analysis of Questionnaire Data on Meaning of Working Life in Japan,
Germany, and the U.S.
(4) Investigation on Localization of Overseas Operation of Japanese Firms(5) Development of Research on Corporate Organization in Japan(6) Diffusion Process of the Theory of Barnard and Simon
The third activity is making The Academic Association for Organizational
24

Science A ward to outstanding books or papers published by relatively younger
members. This annual award is also called the "Takamiya Award" in memory offormer president Professor Susumu TAKAMIY A, who manifested zeal forfounding the award. Past award-winning books have been as follows.
(1) 1984: Tadao KAGONO (Kobe University), lkujiro NONAKA (Hitotsubashi
University), Kiyonori SAKAKIBARA (London Business School), and Akihiro
OKUMURA (Keio University), Comparison of Management between Japaneseand U.S. Firms(2) 1985: Tsuneo SASAKI (Musashi University), Henri Fayol; Haruo M口�TA(Musashi University), Philosophy ofManagement(3) 1986: Akinobu SAKASHITA (Kobe University), Research on Organizational
Behavior(4) 1987: Takatoshi IMADA (Tokyo Institute of Technology), Self-Organizing(5) 1988: Nobuo TAKAHASHI (University of Tokyo), Design of Adaptive
Organizations(6) 1989: Tamio HATTORI (Toyo University of Economics), Management
Development in Korea(7) 1990: Masao TAO (Kyoto University), Organization and Management of
Public Services(8) 1991: Toshio KOBAYASHI (Okayama University), Conditions ofJusticeThrough the above activities, the Association has developed diverse
research on the impact of social change on organizations, the characteristics oforganizations which respond to these impacts, and the effect of these responses onsocieties. It has also been developing the methodology of organizational studies.
Now, Professor Yasuo OKAMOTO (Aoyama Gakuin University) is thethird president since Professor TAKAMIYA passed away in China in 1986. The
majority of the members, who amount to over 1200 in total, is shifting to the third
generation for the Association. Basic policies have been maintained since its
foundation, however. The Association has stuck to pursuing interdisciplinary
approaches and stimulating younger researchers. Our activities will expand anddevelop based on these policies
Yasuo OKAMOTO (Aoyama Gakuin University)
Junjiro SHINTAKU (Gakushuin University)

25

JAPAN PORT ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION
It should be remembered that port issues were becoming of increasing
importance in the mid-1950s, when Japan's economy was growing rapidly. As acondition for the nation's high growth, a policy was essential to strengthen the
productivity of an equipment type of heavy chemical industry. Certainly,
improvements in the functions of port operations were urgently needed to promote
the policy. It is no exaggeration to say, therefore, that the importance of port
operating functions for Japan's high economic growth was socio-economicallywill recognized. It was this that led to the establishment of the Japan Port
Economics Association.
p呵�ple involved in port operations, government officers and researchers atuniversities met to discuss the port issues from the expert point of view,
developing into the establishment of an independent association to study port
operations. A general meeting for that purpose was held at the Yokohama Silk
Hotel on October 17, 1962.
From the birth of the Association to its 31st annual conference slated for1992 in Kushiro Port, its presidency was from Takeshi YANO (then at Waseda
University), Ginjiro SHIBATA (then at Kobe University), Hisashi AZUMA (thenat Tokai University) to Toshiro KITAMI (Aoyama Gakuin University) at present.
The Association now has a membership of 310 standing members and 42
organization members. Let us have a look at recent study trends, viewing the areas
covered by presentations delivered at recent annual conferences.
Economic activities in 1985 may be characterized by such factors as
deregulation, internationalization, information society and diversification.
Activation was highlighted in many areas in the so-called higher yen period ofaround 1985. Seven presenters, namely Masatoshi KAGAWA, Manzo KANAI(Institute of Area Planning Architecture), Yasoi YASUDA (Tsukuba University),
Jae Ha KIM (Korea, Seiden University), Torn ZAKO (Municipality of Kobe
City), Takehiko KIMURA (Nagoya Port Authority), and Toshiro KITAMI(Aoyama Gakuin University) shared presentations entitled "Port Activation andCity Redevelopment" at the 24th annual conference in Osaka Port in 1985. An
especially interesting point was the great difference in their ways of identifying
port activation.
At the 25th annual conference in Tokyo Port in 1986, when internationallycompounded transportation was advancing, five presenters: Genji YAMADA(Total St�dy Group for Ports and Transport), Jae Ha KIM (Korea, Seiden
University), Kiyoya ICHIKI ( University of Distributional Economics), Manabu
YAMAMURA (Meiji Gakuin University), and Keizo TAKAHASHI (Tokyo
Metropolitan Government) gave presentations on "The Port and Prospects for26

Internationally Compounded Transport." Their presentations focussed oninternationally diversified and compounded transport organizations and the rapidlychanging port.
The port has become of economic and social interest as part of the urban
function. At the 26th annual conference in Shimizu Port in 1987 six presenters:
Gyo SUZUKI (Hiroshima National College of Maritime Technology), Norihisa
YOKOUCHI (Nihon University), Manzo KANAI (Institute of Area Planning
Architecture), Toyoharu TAMEKUNI (Institute of Area Planning Architecture),
Katsuhiko KURODA (Kyoto University), and Takehiko KIMURA (Nagoya Port
Authority) delivered presentations on the subject of "Redevelopment of the Coastal
Zone and the Port." A deeply interesting point of their presentations was that theyshared the same view of the necessity and tendency for the redevelopment of thecoastal zone nation-wide and the importance of the port area as an urban function.
With the common theme of how hinterland issues become associated withgrowing port functions, the 27th annual conference was held at Asahikawa
University in Hokkaido in 1988. In their presentations entitled "the Port and
Hinterland," seven presenters: Yuzo IZUMI (Hakodate University), Fujio
CHISUWA (Port City Institute of Information Service), Toru YAMAJYO (Nihon
University), Ton Kon PAKU (Korea, Enko University), Manzo KANAI (Instituteof Area Planning Architecture), Yoshihiko KITAHARA (Nanao Survey Drawing),and Masanori KUMASHIRO (Kumashiro System Design), pointed out that it wasprobably most necessary for port personnel to get involved in developing thehinterland. Their presentations provided a base for further study. Thus, besides
an analysis of the hinterland, their presentations attracted the attention of the people
attending.
The 28th annual conference was held in Kita-Kyushu Port in 1989 under thetitle of "The Port and a Changing International Economic Society", in connection
with which advanced internationalization was focussed on. Six presenters there
were Sachiko ENDO (Kawamura Gakuen Women's University), Toru
YAMAJYO (Nihon University), Etsuko SHIBATA (Osaka City University), Gyo
SUZUKI (Yokohama Harbor Polytechnic College), Manabu YAMAMURA (Meiji
Gakuin University), and Takehiko KIMURA (Nagoya Port Authority), whospoke about the same subject. It seemed really important that they shared aperception of the necessity for proper measures to be taken by port management
especially when the international distribution system and port environments weredrastically changing due to higher containerization for transportation.
The waterfront issues have to be answered socio-economically along withadvanced internationalization. The 29th annual conference was held at Kawasaki
Port in 1990 on the theme of "Waterfront Development and the Port." Sixpresenters: Jae Ha KIM (Korea, Seiden University), Sachiko ENDO (Kawamura
27

Gakuen Women's University). Manabu YAMAMURA (Meiji Gakukin
University), Yoji AMEMIYA (Toyama National College of Maritime Technology),
Teruo KOBAYASHI (Kanto Gakuin University), Tadashi ASHIMI (Municipalityof Osaka City) jointly with Kazuhiko SAKAKIBARA (Osaka Industrial
University), and Toshiro KITAMI (Aoyama Gakuin University), reported on theirstudies on the theme. They touched upon regional trends in waterfront
development and the cores of waterfront issues in an economic society.
The Association celebrated its 30th anniversary in Yokohama Port in 1991.
Five presenters delivered presentations on "Yokohama Port - Issues andProspects." They were Koichi MATSUHASHI (Yokohama Harbor Polytechnic
College), Sachiko ENDO (Kawamura Gakuen Women's University), Manabu
YAMAMURA (Meiji Gakuin University), Gyo SUZUKI (Yokohama Harbor
Polytechnic College), and Yoshimi NAGAO (Nihon University). It should be
noted that many participants agreed with the presenters, sharing the ideas they
pointed out - basic problems embraced by the port industry and port-city
integration are important issues to be studied for the further growth of the port of
Yokohama. Along with the annual conference in Yokohama Port. Volume 30 of"Port Economic Studies," which features members' treatises was published incelebration of the 30th anniversary of the Association. twenty-four members havecontributed study articles to the Association's organ. All the members are sure that
the Association will continue growing.
Now let us look at other presentations at the Conferences.
Eight persons gave presentations at the 24th National Conference in 1985.
They were Shoichi ABIKO (Tokyo Transport College), Shigemi HONDA(Aoyama Gakuin University), Yuzuru MIYATA (Mitsubishi Total Institute), Akira
MORIGUCHI (Yokohama Port Harbor Training College), Manabu YAMAMURA(Meiji Gakuin University), Takao IRITANI (Osaka City University,
Postgraduate), Yoshimi NAGAO (Kyoto University), and Yoshikazu
KAWASAKI (Transport Ministry). Among their presentations, those gaining
special attention were "Wage Structure for Laborers at Ports" jointly by Shigemi
HONDA and Yuzuru MIYATA, and "Port Management in large Cities andIntegrated Management Organs" by Takao IRITANI. It is hoped that further
research will be made in the areas presented.
Eleven persons gave their presentations at the 25th National Conference in1986. They were Masao SATO (Tokyo Metropolitan Government), Shozo
TANAKA (Japan Marine Surveyors and Sworn 'Measurers' Association),
Yoshinaga SAKAI (Chubu Women's College), Masatsugu TANIHATA (Tokyo
Metropolitan Government), Sachiko ENDO (Ochanomizu Women's University,
postgraduate), Fujio CHISUWA (Port City Information Service Co.), Kisaburo28

ENOMOTO (Sea Transport Interpreter), Ton Kon PAKU (Korea, Enko
University), Genichiro TAK.AMI (Yokohama Port Economic Institute), Mitsunobu
HIBINO (Nagoya Port Authority), and Kon Gi KIM (Korea, Seoul University).
Such presentations as℃ ompetitive Effects and X Efficiency" by Yoshinaga
SAKAI, "Land Transportation and Change in Port Harbor Function" by Sachiko
ENDO, and "Industrial Multinational Strategies and Port Harbors" by Mitsunobu
HIBINO drew interest from among a large audience.℃ompetitive Effects and X
Efficiency" was especially highly evaluated for the development of its reallypersuasive approach demonstrated in the research process and technique.
Seven persons gave presentations at the 26the National Conference in 1987.
They were Takahiro MIYATA (Commercial Science Institute, Nippon University),
Kwai Kyei AMOABENG (Hitotsubashi University, postgraduate), Sachiko
ENDO (Ochanomizu Women's University, postgraduate), Shoichi ABIKO(Tokyo Transport College), Jae Ha KIM (Korea, Seiden University), Akio
NAKAMOTO (Sasebo Municipal City), and Genichiro TAK.AMI (Yokohama Port
Economic Institute).
Such presentations as "Harbor Functions to Meet the Advance ofInternational Compound Transportation", "Mechanization and Labor at Japanese
Harbors" by Kwai Kyei AMOABENG and "Strategy for Port Management in
Korea" by Jae HA KIM attracted attention for their very suggestive contents.
"Mechanization and Labor at Japanese Harbors" was especially highly evaluatedfor pointing out useful issues in terms of demonstrative research based on thefindings of questionnaires.
Six persons gave presentations at the 27th National Conference in 1988.
They were Tamotsu TANI (Hamamatsu Information Technology School),
Mitsunobu HIBINO (Nagoya Port Authority), Kon Gi KIM (Korea, Seoul
University). Kei Su KAK (Tokyo Institute of Technology, postgraduate), andShigeji MATSUURA (Aichi Gakuin University). Among them, thosepresentations which gained attention included "Effects Exerted by the Growth of
New Container Operating Harbors upon the Zone behind Senior Container
Operating Harbors" presented by Kei Su KAK. The demonstrative research of
those presentations was seen to attract strong interest from among the audience,
providing a political sort of issue toward the age of containerization. The area ofcontainerization would require further research and development ofcontainerization issues.
Seven persons gave their presentations at the 28th National Conference in
1989. They were Fujio CHISUWA (Hiroshima National College of Maritime
Technology), Pellera (phonetic) V.I.D. J (Keio University, postgraduate), Shoichi
ABIKO (Gunma Women's College), Kyon Dei KIM (Aoyama Gakuin University,
postgraduate), Isao TOMIT A (Yokohama Harbor Polytechnic College), Hideki
29

YOSHIOKA (Hokkai Gakuen Kitami University), and Kensei SO (People's
Republic of China, Bukan River Technological School). Among them, there wereinteresting presentations such as℃ompetition Over the Harbor Pricing Decision
and Service Efficiency" by Pellera V.I.D. J. and "Assistance at Harbors andHarbor Management" by Kyon Dei KIM. The process of harbor pricing decisions
and harbor management research are believed to be subjects that should be studied
further in depth.
Six persons gave presentations at the 29th National Convention in 1990.
They were Kyon Dei KIM (Aoyama Gakuin University, postgraduate), Fujio
CHISUWA (Hiroshima National College of Maritime Technology), Koichi
MATSUHASHI (Yokohama Harbor Polytechnic College), Mitsunobu HIBINO(Nagoya Port Authority), Isao TOMITA (Yokohama Harbor Polytechnic College),
and Tamotsu TANI (International Informational Economic Technological School).
One of the characteristic points of their presentations was that they focused on
issue in connection with port harbor industry. In this sense, a variety of
approaches to research on the port harbor industry can be expected in the future.
At the 30th National Convention in 1991, the thirteen persons·mentioned
below gave presentations, providing ample issues to celebrate the Association's
30th anniversary. It is hoped that-port harbor research will be further deepened andadvanced.
Fujio CHISUWA (Hiroshima National College of Maritime Technology),
Ton Kon PAK (Korea, Enko University), Kensei SO (People's Republic ofChina, Bukan River Technological School), Kyon Dei KIM (Aoyama Gakuin
University, postgraduate), Akio NAKAMOTO (Sasebo Municipal City), Masato
MIMURA (Kanagawa University), Shoji HARIGA YA (Aomori Chuo College),
Takehiko KIMURA (Nagoya Port Authority), Masato HORINO (Yokohama
Harbor Polytechnic College), Tamotsu TANI (International Informational
Economic Technological School) and Isao TO MIT A (Yokohama Harbor
Polytechnic College).
Isao TOMITA (Yokohama Harbor Polytechnic College)

30

JAPAN RISK MANAGEMENT SOCIETY
In 1978, 29 scholars headed by Professor Toshiaki KAMEi (Kansai
University) had a meeting at Kansai University and on that occasion, the Japan
Risk Management Society was founded. The Society's activity and publication ofits journal (Risk and Insurance Management, JARMS Report) soon gained social
recognition, and in November, 1984, the Society was officially recognized asregistered learned association under Article 18 of the Law concerning Japanese
Academic Councils.
Toward the second half of the 1980's, Japanese industry encountered new
types of business risks such as financial crimes, blackmailing, trading friction, andthe rising yen. Many advanced companies adopted the concept of risk
management to develop specific contingency plans and risk management manuals
in order to protect themselves against serious risks. The widely reported Glico­Morinaga case aroused keen attention of the news media, and as a result, the term"risk management" became common knowledge.
The concept of risk management was introduced for the first time in Japan byHidetaka TAKAGI (The Non-life Insurance Institute of Japan) who published in1957 a paper titled "A Glimpse of Risk Management in the United States" and�yProfessor Toshiaki KAMEI, who wrote "Introduction to Consideration ofBusiness Risks" in 1961. Starting from 1975, a large number of works became
available on the subject. These included translations of numerous books andarticles on risk management, and the term came to be accepted in this country.
Uncertainty over the future of the Japanese economy triggered by the oil crisis,
diversification of business risks arising from pollution and product liability claims,
growth of accidents in number and scale, emergence of country risks and othersocial changes were factors contributing to the public awareness.
Main and common discussion topics and contents in the annual conference of
the Japan Risk Management Society for these ten years are summarized as follows:(1) Function and scope of insurance management
Business is constantly surrounded by a large variety of risks. To survive as agoing concern, it must walk on a tightrope which is the only way to achievesustained growth. Thus, manag�ment is essentially an act of finding a balance
between risks and opportunities, and continuing organized efforts to maintainproduction and sales on that precarious balance. A number of companies in fact
fail to protect themselves and shut down. The purpose of risk management underthese circumstances is to protect business against danger. Risks must be managed
as an integral part of business strategy by a scientific approach.
31

As the term "risk management" becomes popular, it starts to go its own way
and many people tend to see it as profitable management knowhow, enough toensure the well-being of enterprises. This is of course a big misunderstanding.
Risk management is not offensive management aimed at growth and maximizationof return, because it is defensive in nature and aimed at protection of business. It
does not aspire to increase revenue and profit, but tries to reduce costs, especiallythose arising from risks, that are charged on income. It attempts to identify therisks and to control such risks so that they are manageable. Risk management is
an activity for implementing and accounting for rational handling of risks.
These days, it is widely held that business is responsible to society. Social
responsibility of private enterprises is discussed from various angles.
Nevertheless, we believe that a company cannot fulfill its social responsibility
unless it can survive, and that the first and most important responsibility of acompany is to avoid failure, and this requires it to implement risk management andmake sure that the business generates adequate return on investment.
In this respect, it is particularly important that revenue is sufficient to yield
adequate return and that various risks are transformed into adequate costs. Thisrequires in tum that the company must be able to respond effectively to a changing
business environment, i.e., competition, political conditions, social environment,
economy, and technology. It must weigh carefully its strengths and weaknesses,
forecast what types of hazards could be critical in the anticipated futureenvironment and what perils there will be, so that effective means to deal withthese risks and perils are devised and implemented when necessary.
(2) Criminal risks of business and risk management
The business environment of today is very difficult, and risks are gaining indiversity as well as in scale. It is not rare that a single risk has turned out to cause
serious damage to a company or even to result in bankruptcy. Examples of suchrisks are earthquake, fire, various liability claims and criminal acts. For thisreason, management of these risks has become an object of critical management
concern. These days, a company is exposed to a variety of crimes both within andoutside of its organization, and very often it ends up as a victim. Consequently,
the need for contingency planning is now widely recognized. Bank robbery,fraudulent insurance claims, computer crimes, misuse of credit cards, kidnapping
for ransom, poison blackmail, and the like are increasing, of which the 1984
Glico-Morinaga case is a typical example. As a result, business organizations are
now well aware of the importance of management of individual risks.
Management may attempt to handle the crime risk through several methods,
including assumption, loss control, and insurance. Each of these methods is32

deficient in some respect. The method of assumption may invite ruin. Loss
control efforts tend to be haphazard and often ineffective. Insurance methods
suffer from adverse selection, high costs, and gaps in protection because ofnarrow definitions of perils.
(3) Modem society and risk management
Anyone who has income or assets makes some effort to deal with the purerisks to which he or she is exposed. Thus, most of us are risk managers,
responsible for protecting ourselves and our families against personal, property,
and liability risks. Professionals who have this responsibility in organizations use
the process of risk management. The significance of a risk to a person is
influenced by his or her ability to bear any loss. A risk that is unimportant for a
wealthy family or a large firm may be very significant for those with less financial
strength. In addition to evaluating measures of severity and frequency, a risk
manager will want to study dimensions of the entire probability distribution foreach type of exposure, including measures of symmetry, expected value, anddispersions. Such measures of risk aid us in making risk management decisions.
The family risk manager must set objectives; identify exposures of thefamily's income, assets, and general welfare; evaluate those to implement the
program; and review the program at regular intervals and whenever there is asignificant change in the family's situation. The risk manager need not perform
this function alone. A professional life-health insurance agent can help with thepersonal risks and a professional property insurance agent can do the same withregard to property-liability risks.
(4) Selection of the risk treatment device
It is important to examine some techniques for meeting the problem of risk.
After identifying and evalua�ing exposures to risk, systematic consideration can begiven to alternative methods for managing each exposure. The basic methods
available for handling risks are: risk avoidance, risk retention, loss control, andrisk transfer.
Risk avoidance means that a certain loss exposure is never acquired, or an
existing loss exposure is abolished. The major advantage of avoidance is that the
chance of loss is reduced to zero if the loss exposure is not acquired. In addition,
if an existing loss exposure is abolished, the possibility of loss is either eliminatedor reduced because the activity or product that could produce a loss has beenabandoned. However, avoidance has two disadvantages. Firstly, it may not be
possible to avoid all losses. Secondly, it may not be practical or feasible to avoid
33the exposure.
Risk retention means that an individual or a business firm retains part or all ofa given risk. Risk retention can be either active or passive. Active retention meansthat an individual is consciously aware of the risk and deliberately plans to retain
all or part of it. It is used for two major reasons. Firstly, risk retention can savemoney. Insurance may not be _purchased at all, or it may be purchased as adeductible. In either way, there is often a substantial saving in the cost of
insurance. Secondly, the risk may be deliberately retained because commercial
insurance is either unavailable or can be obtained only by the payment ofprohibitive premiums. Risk can also be retained passively. Certain risks may be
unknowingly retained because of ignorance, indifference, or laziness. This isoften very dangerous if a risk that is retained has the potential for destroying aperson financially. In summary, risk retention can be an extremely usefultechnique for handling risk, especially in a modem corporate risk management
program. Risk retention, however, is appropriate primarily for high-frequency,
low-severity risks where potential losses are relatively small. Except underunusual circumstances, an individual should not use the technique of risk retention
to retain low-frequency, high-severity risks, such as the risk of catastrophic
medical expenses, long-term disability, or a liability lawsuit.
Loss control activities are designed to reduce both the frequency and theseverity of losses. Unlike the technique of avoidance of loss, loss control deals
with an exposure that the firm does not wish to abandon. The purpose of loss
control activities is to change the characteristics of the exposure so tha�it is more
acceptable to the firm which wishes to keep the exposure but wants to reduce thefrequency and severity of losses. Thus, loss control has two major objectives:
loss prevention and loss reduction. Loss prevention aims at reducing theprobability of loss so that the frequency of losses is reduced. Although stringent
loss prevention efforts can reduce the frequency of losses, some losses will
inevitably occur. Thus, the second objective of loss control is to reduce theseverity of a loss after it occurs. The goal of loss prevention and reduction is to
reduce losses to the minimum that is compatible with a reasonable level of humanactivity and expense.
Risk transfer involves payment by one party to a risk bearer who agrees toassume a risk that the transferor desires to escape. Sometimes the degree of risk is
reduced through the transfer process because the transferee may be in a better
position to use the law of large numbers to predict losses. Insurance is one
example of this phenomenon. In other cases, the degree of risk remains the sameand is merely shifted from the transferor to the transferee for a price. Viewed as
one of many risk management techniques, it is clear that there are some situations
in which the purchase of insurance is the preferred way to manage a particular34

risk. However, there are other cases where alternative risk management tools are
preferable. Rather, it should be considered as one of many potential techniques
available through the risk management process. Noninsurance transfers refer tothe various methods other than insurance by which a pure risk and its potential
financial consequences can be transferred to another party. Some noninsurance
techniques that are commonly used in risk management programs include
contracts, leases, and hold-harmless agreements.
Often the wisest course of action is to use concurrently more than one methodof handling a risk. For example, loss prevention and reduction methods can beused in conjunction with both retention and transfer of risks. Selecting themethod of handling the risks that have been identified and evaluated as being
important requires consideration of the ability to bear losses. Some risks must be
avoided because they are unbearable for either financial or humanitarian reasons,and cannot be transferred or handled in other ways. Others may be small enoughin terms of potential loss and sufficiently responsive to loss prevention andreduction measures to justify retention. The selection of appropriate risk
management techniques is a dynamic problem. The best method for handling aparticular exposure today may not be the best method a year from now because somany relevant factors change regularly.
(5) Business management and risk management
There are three types of risk management: insurance management-oriented,
business management-oriented, and management strategy-oriented. The insurance
management-oriented risk management is mainly used for handling of pure risks.
Effective use of insurance constitutes the core of risk management, while
prevention of accidents is considered as the preliminary step. Prevention of
accidents involves protection from calamity and accidents such as fire, explosion,
earthquake, theft, traffic accidents, product liability and the like, as well as
promotion of safety and prevention of work-related accidents. The characteristics
of insurance management-oriented risk management, therefore, change dependingon the extent that non-insured risks are included in the management. At the sametime, insurance coverage does not apply to some pure risks, and content of
insurance management-oriented risk management must reflect measures to be taken
for these types of risks. It is usually understood as a part of financial control.
Financial control in itself is management of capital, funds and asset risks
implemented for the purpose of safeguard of assets. It is based on the rationale
typical to financial executives that physical risks are the most important of all
business risks.
Business management-oriented and management strategy-oriented types deal

35

with all aspects of business risks, including pure and speculative risks. Insurance
is not necessarily the crucial part of these approaches, because they are a mixtureof all rational ways and means to be applied scientifically to reduce exposures ofrisks. Management of risks, according to these concepts, extends not only toindividual departments or functional units but also to the overall management of
the company as a whole. In other words, when management of risks is
implemented on a department level, it constitutes business management-oriented
risk management, while its implementation on the entire company makes it anelement of management strategy.
At present, the business environment for most companies is becoming more
severe. Uncertainty, discontinuity and opacity of environmental conditions are
such that the survival of a company largely depends on its ability to adapt to theenvironment. Furthermore, as business casualties are gaining both in frequency
and scale, business must have effective means of protecting itself, while it mustmeet its social obligation to stay as a going concern. A company today thus faces
countless risks and it must continue operation on a delicate balance between risks
and opportunities. Under these conditions, it is impossible for risk management to
restrict itself to management of pure and well-defined risks with the emphasis on
insurance. Obviously, however, we cannot write off insurance management­oriented risk management. It is an important element of business management andstrategy for avoidance of risks at large.
(6) Internationalization of risk management
International corporations depend on international business. International
business is affected by acts of foreign governments. Thus, exposure to politicalrisk distinguishes international corporations from domestic corporations. Politicalrisk exists not only in countries with an unstable political environment but also in a
growing number of countries where there is a distrust of international
corporations. The activities of some multinationals reflect unfavorably on all andmay engender an anti-foreign investment climate. Political risk may be defined as
the possibility of loss stemming from acts of government and other politicalorganization or political acts by business or terrorists. The most serious exposureof loss arises from exp四�priation or confiscation of property, but losses may also
arise from the impos1t10n of trade barriers, foreign exchange controls, thecancellation of import-export licenses, and other actions. Political risk should bethought of as a peril rather than a unique loss exposure. Viewed in this way, allpotential losses can be classified as property, net income, liability or personnel
losses, and this classification system can be applied to international as well as
domestic operations. Political risks may well be the most dynamic area of risk

36

management in the next several years.
(7) History and future of risk management
Risk management has its roots in Risikopolitik in Germany during the1920's, and insurance management which developed in the United States during
the 1930's. In Germany, Risikopolitik started as a science to protect enterprises
from rampant inflation and as a management approach for survival. In the Unitedstates, the Great Depression caused the development of insurance management as ameans of business rationalization and cost control.
To be specific, risk management in the United States proceeded as businessrisk management to protect business. In the beginning, it was conceived as
management of pure risks and insurance for insurable risks, but in due course, theconcept was broadened to all aspects of business risk including speculative risks.
As such, management of business risk became a scientific discipline, and to that
extent, risk management exceeded the framework of financial management as ameans of insurance against natural calamity to encompass all risks inherent inproduction, sales, finance, labor relations and other management aspects. It wasnecessary to understand risk management as ways and means to protect businessfrom failure.
Management of non-insurable risks must deal with those for which protection
by msurance 1s not available as well as those which make msurance uneconomical.
It has to deal with a large variety of speculative risks. A problem which arises
here is that mangement of speculative risks is a part of the ongoing activity of allorganizational or functional units within an enterprise, and it is difficult toassociate a particular organizational or functional unit to a specific risk
management approach. For example, market research, sales promotion,
advertisement, credit research, quality control, hedging and the like are all meansof management of marketing risks, but none of them has any clear correspondence
to actual and specific risks.
Although risk management is by now a well accepted concept and Japanesebusiness has adopted it as a part of management strategy and practice, certain
industries do not seem to have a correct understanding of risk management.
The conference of the Japan Risk Management Society held in September
1992 adopted the principles of risk management as the basic overall issue of
discussion. The idea was to clarify the role of the insurance agent in risk
management efforts and to study the concept of the management consultant in risk
management programs.
Keiji RABARA (Kansai University)
37THE SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POLICY
The studies which members of the Society have done are of wide variety,including topics of theories of social policy, methodology of study, trade union
and industrial relations, wages, employment, hours of work, personnel
management, immigrant workers, multinational companies, small businesses,
social security and welfare, population problems, and gender relations. As it is
impossible to sum up the total academic activities of the members in a short article,
some controversies in their studies will be presented here.
The Society was established in 1896 by distinguished scholars of the timeafter the German Verein fur Sozialpolitik. Its aim was more practical thanacademic, to propose policy alternatives independently from the government. In
the 1920's, however, contradictions between socialists and conservatives forced
the Society to stop its activities till the breakup of imperial Japan.
1. The Okouchi theory and theories of particularity
After World War II, the Society was restarted in 1950. At the first
conference of the new Society, fierce debates occurred around the Okouchi theoryof social policy. Prof. OKOUCHI maintained that social policy is of capitalistic
nature,while it often appears anti-capitalistic, protecting workers and restraining
the power of capital as in the case of factory laws. He stressed the initiative of thestate. His opponents, most of whom were militant socialists or com111:unists, put
forward the opposing opinion that social policy is a result of the labor movement.
They regarded social policy as a concession given by capitalists.
Discussions were made mainly on the possibility of social improvement
under a capitalist government. The debate was done in the midst of social
turbulence with many big strikes and labor control over companies. For a coupleof years just after the War, employers couldn't decide even personnel policy, as
well as wage and labor conditions, without union consent. The Communists had apowerful influence upon the labor movement. Some people believed that acommunist revolution was coming. That is why what is just a semantic problem
in today's sense caused such great controversy.
It is, however, an interesting topic of methodology in the study of social
policy: What is social policy? The discussions on the essence of social policy
attracted even theorists of social science. It was one of the major controversies in
the history of social science in Japan.
OKOUCHI defined social policy as an economic policy to protect theeconomic resource of labor power. He held that welfare policy is not a social
policy because it is a policy for a non-labor force such as old or disabled people.
38

However, today social security for the old is a major field of social policy.
Secondly, while he maintained that social policy is made for producers, not for
consumers, policies for the latter have often been seen in history.
TAKADA held that the Okouchi theory defined social policy too narrowly togive a good historical perspective or practical suggestions for social policy. He
proposed the alternative definition that social policy is measures taken by the state
to deal with social problems. He asserted that the definition is dynamic in that theactual state of the state and social problems decide the specific character of social
policy.
OKOUCHI left another legacy to the study of social policy: It is precisely
the legacy of the Kouza School of Marxist economics and history. OKOUCHI
discussed Japanese peculiarities in industrial relations. He was pessimistic of thepossibility of change in the peculiarities, as many intellectuals have been. The
tendency continued till the end of the high economic growth period, when theJapanese economic catchup came near its end.
2. Enterprise Unionism
The revolutionary situation didn't last long. After the Korean War theJapanese economy began to grow rapidly. Industrial relations laws and social
security laws were enacted, and the basic structure of social policy completed. A
younger generation of scholars learned American theories on labor economics andindustrial relations, proclaiming "from social policy to labor economics." Most of
the scholars specializing in social policy had learned German theories.
The new generation made vast empirical studies concerning trade unions, thelabor market, standard of living, and social welfare. They sought to find Japanesepeculiarities of social policy and social conditions. One of the major findings wasseniority-based employment relations and enterprise unionism. These Japanesecharacteristics were found through comparison with western models, which werebuilt not from first-hand knowledge but mainly from books on British or Americanindustrial relations.
Many intellectuals thought after World War II that Japanese society shouldhave been modernized. They expected leadership from the working class andtrade unions in modernization. Japanese enterprise unionism, however, sought
economic security, rather than shop control, and was more willing to accept
management than American or European unions. It was bitterly criticized by manyscholars, because they believed that unionism should have been based on anindustrial bases, not at the enterprise level, and that unionism should have more
confronted than cooperated with management. Japanese unions organized white­collar employees, who would be promoted to mangers, as well as blue-collar
39

workers.
Historical studies also had a similar tendency. Historians of social policy
and the labor movement concentrated on the study of leftist unions, considering
why the leftist movement couldn't gain a majority. Some authors, however,analyzed the origins of rightist unionism and works councils which laid thefoundations of the enterprise unionism.
The origins of enterprise unions are not clear. Some authors found theorigin in works councils established by management. Others stressed theinfluence of the Sangyo-Hokokukai (Associations for Contribution to the Statethrough Industry), holding that they were their direct fore-runner. The
Associations were established in the 1930s as fascist labor organizations, taking
the place of trade unions which were forced to dissolve. They were company­
based organizations. Anyway, while Japanese labor unions before World War II
were not always company based, unions after the War emerged as enterpriseumons.
Recent studies held that post-war unionism tried to promote production for
the recovery of the Japanese economy and society. Unionism controlled or had avoice in wide areas of management including personnel and production.
OKOUCHI already held the same discussion about 40 years ago. He called it"productionist unionism." While unionism made violent attacks on the
management, it was sensitive to economic growth.
When management counterattacked against militant unionism in the late
1950s, unions were split into two: cooperative unions which sought economic
security through conciliation, and militant ones who tried to keep control over the
management. The former were called "second unions," the latter "first unions."
Clashes between the two ended in the victory of the former. Union members
chose economic security over union control over management. Cooperation
unionism was also keen on the matter of production.
"The Three Principles of Productivity" proclaimed by the Japan Productivity
Center are a symbol of the cooperation unionism in Japan. The Center was a tri�
partite organization to promote productivity, established under the assistance of the
US government as a part of the Marshall Plan. The principle declared
improvements in living standards through productivity growth, which could bemade by investment and new machines. Furthermore, the fruit of growth must be
shared among management, labor, and the public.
Cooperation unionism was established in the high economic growth period.
Management devised a new style of personnel management, stimulating workers'
initiative in production. Quality circles and other small group activities weretypical examples. They became popular in the 1970s. This "participative
management"was another topic of controversy. Does it really provide workers
40with the opportunity for participation in management and initiatives? Is it anotherkind of exploitation?
KUMAZA WA energetically discussed the matter of participation or
exploitation. He found two kinds of quality circles: one mainly for improvementof production, the other for improvement of workers'welfare as well as ofproduction. He praised the latter because of its participatory nature.
NITTA analyzed labor management relations in the steel industry, holdingthat quality circles function as training and development of labor. He stressed thepositive nature of small group activities.
Quality circles led workers to extension of work or "job enlargement."
Workers were sometimes trained to do multiple jobs. If needed, workers would
help co-workers in different jobs. Transfer is easier under the system than under
rigid division of labor. It has been often praised as a flexible work system.
ITO made intensive researches on work assignments in engineering shops,
finding blue-collar workers even did the work usually done by engineers.
3. Japanese-style Management
The blurred division of labor is not only seen between blue-collar and white­collar employees, but also seen among white-collar workers. Japanese managers
have usually had two or three different kinds of job, for example sales andpersonnel. A generalist type of career is common among Japanese managers.
They are frequently transferred.
TAKADA named the Japanese style of personnel management the pressure
vessel model. When they are employed by a company they are usually not
informed of the job they will do. Only after initial training will their jobs be
decided. And they will experience a generalist career. In this way, they aretrained as company men, not as professionals or specialists. Their identification
rests on their companies, not on their professions or jobs.
As mentioned above, these white-collar employees are also organized in thesame unions as manual workers. It is not unusual that top management have been
union officers. This is the basis for Japanese-style management. The origin of thismanagement style is not clear, but it was not common before World War II. It
was promoted by the post-war unionism which demanded eq叫status for all
employees in common, instead of a white-collar elite.
In more generalized terms, Japanese enterprises have well organized internal
labor markets. The internal labor market is a common feature of modern firms
worldwide. Kazuo KOIKE thus held that the seniority system which is thought ofas a basic feature of Japanese-style management is a historical characteristic
common in advanced economies with deep internal labor markets. He did research41

on internal labor markets in the United States, finding common features with theJapanese.
That was important and epoch-making work in studies relating to social
policy. Before him, most scholars had made a structural analysis of their subjects.
Many sought to find structural differences between Japan and western countries.
But KOIKE, starting his career with a study in labor economics, saw functional
equivalents common to Japan and the United States. His works appeared in the
1970s, at a time when the Japanese economic had grown to rival western
economies. The intellectual concerns turned from Japanese backwardness to thebackground for economic growth. KOIKE's theory was timely for seeing therationality and generality of the Japanese system. He also analyzed the function of
the Japanese internal labor market to find that skill formation is the core of theJapanese system.
Recently he has gone ahead to assert that the seniority system is the common
essence of personnel management both in Japan and the States or Europe. It isquestionable, because Japanese-style management has different principles of
personnel management as its US or European counterparts.
TAKADA found through case studies of Japanese transplants or offices
abroad that managerial staff working for Japanese companies are managed inwestern style, different from managers working for the same companies in Japan.
There are differences in style or principles of recruitment, salary, promotion,
education, career, and even structure of firm, especially power of personnel
division. Functionally, western internal labor markets are not so well�stablishedas the Japanese one. It is too much to say that Japanese and western internal labormarkets are just same. Anyway, however, KOIKE's contribution was great inthat he set a common ground for analyzing both Japanese and western industrial
relations and personnel managements.
4. Feminism and Individualization of Social Policy
1985 is the year when the women's equal employment opportunity law wasenacted. Though the curve of labor force participation for women is still M­
shaped, average length of service of women has been getting longer, andemployment opportunities have grown. The birth rate has been decreasing,too.
The government tries to encourage companies to give assistance to working
mothers.
However, government policy for women still focuses on women as
housekeepers. They are given tax exemptions and pension rights without no extra
contribution. And companies pay family benefit to employees with a spouseearning less than a certain amount of money. Female part-timers are anxious not42

to earn more than the limit. This hinders a greater supply of female labor.
Some specialists argue that the present policy of a family-centered social
security and taxation system should be changed. They think that tax exemptions
for a spouse without full-time work should be abolished, and that all the programs
should be designed on an individual base. The government should support thefinancial independence of women.
Others propose training and career development for part-timers. They thinkof the considerable numbers of part-timers as a stable labor force who don't want
to be full- timers due to family responsibilities. A career ladder and pay increases
through OJT should be essesntial. Their opponents argue that it is a kind of
exploitation of the work force who have limited opportunity to work.
There are many kinds of feminism including the Marxist, liberal, andecological. In social policy liberal feminism is dominant, promoting equal
opportunity for men and women. It is essential for women to get equal
opportunities that family responsibilities should be shared equally. Recently childcare leave for at least one year is stipulated by law for both men and women.
Some companies give family care leave. Shorter hours of work and longer
vacations are still needed for men to share more family responsibility.
Recently death from overwork has been hotly discussed. Hours of work
had been stagnant after the oil shock, and then began to decrease slowly. The
present economic slump will promote and then decreases in working time because
companies have less aggregate man-hours and want to reduce the cost of overtime
pay. The 1990s will see more leisure, and more females working. The divisionof social roles between males and females will be gradually changed.
(Kazuo TAKADA, Hitotsubashi University)

43

SOCIO-ECONOMIC HISTORY SOCIETY
For many years the best explanation of Japan's modernization was thatwhen the Japanese encountered the Western civilization symbolized by thearrival of the "black ships" in 1853 led by Commodore Perry, they regarded
that civilization as superior to their own and promptly set about assimilating
it. There is no doubt that this event marked a major turning point in Japanese
history. However, recent research by members of our society* has shown aconspicuous change in interpretation of Japanese economic history. Becauseof limited space, this essay is to introduce a few of the results, highlighting
the new interpretation of the economic history particularly of the Tokugawa
period (1603-1868).
* The Socio-Economic History Society (1930-). An introduction to
the Society is found in the following two articles which appeared inthis Bulletin, nos. 1 & 5: Yoshio ANDO "Development of
Economics and Economic Societies in Japan" and Ken'ichiro
SHODA "The Development of Socio-Economic History in Japan."
The first to be noted is Akira HAYAMI, et al. eds., Nihon Keizaishi, 8
vols. (Economic History of Japan, Tokyo: lwanami Shoten, 1988-89), towhich more than seventy scholars contributed. The first two volumes deal with
the Tokugawa period, entitled "The Emergence of Economic Society" and "TheStart of Economic Growth" respectively; these titles themselves are challenging
enough against the prevailing stereotyped perception of "stagnant feudal society
under the Tokugawa regime." Dozens of contributors to these two volumes
refrained from using even the term "feudal," and pointed out that certain
developments in the Tokugawa period provided Japan with a foundation that, inseveral aspects, was well suited to later development. Scholars looked morefavorably on the sakoku period. According to these contributions, the true startof Japan's modem economic growth should be moved back to the eighteenth
century. In conjunction with that, sakoku, the policy of isolationism, has been
gaining a reputation as a system that worked to facilitate Japan's later industrial
growth.
The second work to be cited is Takeshi HAMASHIT A and Heita
KAWAKATSU, eds., Ajia Koekiken to Nihon Kogyoka 1500-1900, Tokyo:
Libro Port Publishing, 1991. This is a compilation of papers and comments
presented at the annual conference of our society in 1989, shedding anothernew light on the interpretation of Japan's industrialization. The success ofJapanese economic development is so far understood in a context of a catch-up44

with-the-West process. Altogether, seventeen contributors, mostly belonging
to the post-war generation, however, presented a new and fresh picture that it
was a process of catching up with the Chinese hegemony and eventually
overtaking it during the course of four centuries from 1500 to 1900. What took
place during that period is that Japan upgraded its position from periphery tocenter in the East Asian economic sphere. At the beginning of the period Japan
was apparently a backward economy, which was demonstrated by the outflow
of precious materials from Japan and inflow into the country of Chinese
manufactured goods such as cotton textiles, porcelains, silk and silk fabrics.
Facing the heavy burden of payment in silver or copper to China, she graduallytransformed her capability to produce them for herself, introducing technology
directly or manuals from China. In this way Japan succeeded in stopping theoutflow of money by copying and substituting all imports such as cottons,
silks, sugar, porcelain, etc. with her own products, and became completely
self-sufficient well before the end of the Tokugawa period*. The opening ofports in East Asia in the 19th century, forced by the Western powers, made it
possible for East Asian countries to engage in "free trade" with the West. Whatis overlooked, however, is that free trade took place among Asians, too. This
intra-Asian trade inevitably brought about severe intra-Asian competition,
particularly between Japan and China, resulting in a new division of labor
between them, where Japan now emerged as the main supplier of manufactured
goods while China was a recipient.
* This thesis was presented to the 9th International Economic
History Congress (Bern, 1986) on the theme, "The Emergence of aWorld Economy": Reita KAWAKATSU "The International
Competition in Cotton Goods in the Late Nineteenth Century: Britain
versus India and East Asia," and Kaoru SUGIHARA "Patterns ofIntegration into the World Economy, 1880 - 1913," both in Wolfram
FISCHER et al. eds., The Emergence of a World Economy 1500 1900, Stuttgart: Steiner, 1986.
The above works and others are now accepted by Japanese economic
historians as a challenge to the thesis of European expansion into Asia. As
BRAUDEL demonstrated in his celebrated works, the structure of everyday andmaterial life in Europe changed conspicuously during the historical course fromthe 15th to the 18th century (BRAUDEL, Civilization and Capitalism, English
translation, London, 1981). A series of goods like cotton, sugar, tea, coffee,
and porcelain emerged as necessities in the life of the British and other
Europeans; much of the demand for the new goods was satisfied by imports
45

form Asia, and they were paid for mainly with precious metals, which, in tum,came from the new world. The payments imbalances became so serious that for
instance the British government banned the import of Indian calico at the
beginning of the eighteenth century and when this failed to produce the desired
effectJ it banned the use of the fabric two decades later. Then, in the second
half of that century, inventors such as James Hargreaves, Sir Richard
Arkwright, and Samuel Crompton devised and perfected spinning machines,
enabling England to produce its own cotton fabrics. In this example, it took
about a century for the English to respond fully to a trade problem. Needing a
replacement for textiles imported from Asia, they came across cotton plants in
the Americas, perceived that they could provide an alternative source of raw
materials, and eventually devised spinning machines capable of copying theIndian calicoes and muslins. In this light, the process of the industrial
revolution in England was, to a large extent, the process of developing domestic
textiles as a substitute for imports from India. Here we can see that therevolution was directed against one of the old Eurasian civilizations. It was a
production revolution that undercut the need for imports and thereby
strengthened England's economic independence.
While Europe was experiencing a transformation in its material life infood, drink, dress, demography and family structure, energy and technology,
money and so on, the Japanese material life too was being transformed,
acquiring new goods from the so-called "East Indies" and also from the New
World. Just when cotton, sugar, and porcelain were becoming daily necessities
in Europe, Japan was also importing these products, and they touched off alifestyle revolution not unlike in Europe. The revolution was not, as in Europe,
based on mechanization of the means of production, but it did involve various"new combinations" in a Schumpeterian sense. Akira HAYAMI notes thatinstead of experiencing an industrial revolution, Japan in the Edo period went
through an "industrious revolution." His meaning is that in combining thefactors of production (land, labor, capital), Japan opted for a different mix fromthat employed in the West. The factor endowment in the West, where labor
was scarce relative to other factors of production, made it sensible to maximize
labor productivity with capital-intensive production. But the conditions inJapan, where land was scarce relative to labor, made it more logical to increase
productivity with labor intensive production. Neither of these two ways ofcombining factors of production was inherently superior to the other. Bothrepresented the best choices given the respective endowments of economic
resources. The driving force which made Europe and Japan revolutionize theirproduction system at about the same time was attributed to the need to attain
independence economically from the older Asian civilizations. More46

specifically, both Japanese and Europeans became acquainted with new goods
such as cotton, sugar, silk, tea and porcelain, but both found that the imports
caused a depletion of their precious metals. To staunch this outflow, both
worked out new combinations of the factors of production. In this reading of
history, a new proposition which has emerged from recent works is that theJapanese seclusion in the Tokugawa period was motivated by the same kinds offactors that brought about capitalism in Europe. The economic growth of Japanin the Tokugawa period was moving in tandem with the evolution of European
civilization.
The study of economic history in Japan has certainly entered into an
exciting phase, which is clearly demonstrated by the steady increase inmembership of the society in the last decade from 1,018 in 1982, to 1,098 in
1987, and 1,167 in 1992.
(Heita KAWAKATSU, Waseda University)47

List of Member Associations
1992

THE JAPAN ACCOUNTING ASSOCIATION
日本会計研究学会·Established: 1937
·Number of Members: 1,654·President: Tetsuya MORITA (Hitotsubashi University)·Publication: Monthly bulletin, Kaikei (Accounting)·Liaison Office of the Japan Accounting Association
c/o Moriyama Co., Hayashi Building,
1-10, Nishiki-cho, Kanda, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Kobe College of Commerce from September 30
to October 2, 1993.

THE AGRARIAN HISTORY SOCIETY
土地制度史学会·Established: 1948
·Number of Members: 1,005·Representative Director: Kanji ISHII (The University of Tokyo)·Publication: Tochi Seido Shigaku (The Journal of Agrarian History)-quarterly·Agrarian History Society
c/o Institute of Social Science, The University of Tokyo,
7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at The University of Kyushu on October 9-10,
1993 with some topics of European economic history as the main theme.

THE AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS SOCIETY OF JAPAN(Formerly: THE AGRICULTURAL ECONOMIC SOCIETY OF JAPAN)
日本農業経済学会·Established: 1924
·Number of Members: honorary 29, regular 1,091, associate (students) 85,
cooperative 24·Chairman: Toshio KUROYANAGI (Hokkaido University)·Publication: Bulletin of the Society, Nogyokeizai Kenkyu (Journal of Rural
Economics)一quarterly·The Agricultural Economics Society of Japan
c/o Business Center for Academic Societies of Japan,
5-16-9, Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Tottori University on April 3-4, 1993 with thesymposium "The Problem of Labor Force and Management Systems of Japanese49

JAPAN SOCIETY FOR APPLIED MANAGEMENT (JSAM)
実践経営学会·Established: 1967
·Number of Members: 768·President: Takatsugu NATO (Tokyo International University)·Publication: The Practice ofManagement (Nos. 1-24)"News Letter" twice a year
·Japan Society for Applied Management (JSAM)
c/o Professor Toshimasa YOKOZAWA
Faculty of Business Administration, Asia University
5-24-10, Musashisakai, Musashino-shi, Tokyo 180, JapanThe next meetings will be held at Teikyo University in June and Hokkaido
Joho (Information) University in fall, 1993.

THE JAPAN ASSOCIATION FOR ASIAN POLITICAL
AND ECONOMIC STUDIES
アジア政経学会·Established: 1953
·Number of Members: 740·President: Tatsuo YAMADA (Keio University)·Publication: Asian Studie←qu叩erly·Japan Association for Asian Political and Economic Studies
c/o Professor Tomoyuki KOJIMA
Department of Policy Management, Keio University
5322 Endoh, Fujisawa, Kanagawa 252, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held in November, 1993.

JAPAN AUDITING ASSOCIATION
日本監査研究学会·Established: 1978
·Number of Members: 415·President: Masa'atsu TAKADA (Kobe University)·Publication: Monograph, Research Serie←once a year
Modem Auditiorr-semi-annual journal·Japan Auditing Association
c/o Faculty of Business Administration, Kobe University,
2-1, Rokkodai-cho, Nada-ku, Kobe 657, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Chuo University on June 5-6, 1993 withthe symposium "The Problems of Risk Approach and Auditing Standards."

50

JAPAN SOCIETY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

日本経営学会·Established: 1926
·Number of Members: 1,974·President: Moriyuki TAJIMA (Hitotsubashi University)·Publication: Keieigaku Ronshu--once a year
·Japan Society of Business Administration
c/o The Institute of Business Research, Hitotsubashi University,
2-1, Naka, Kunitachi, Tokyo 186, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Wakayama University in the fall of 1993.

THE JAPAN BUSINESS ENGLISH ASSOCIATION (JBEA)

日本商業英語学会·Established: 1934
·Number of Members: honorary 1, regular 213, supporting 7: total 221·President: Etsuo SHIMIZU (Kansai University of Foreign Studies)·Publication: Nihon Shogyo Eigo Gakkai Kenkyu Nempo (The JBEA Annual
Studies)一once a year
·The Japan Business English Association
c/o Professor Etsuo SHIMIZU
Department of Foreign Languages,
Kansai University of Foreign Studies,
16-1, Kitakatahoko, Hirakata, Osaka 573, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Nagoya Gakuin University on
October 30-31, 1993.

BUSINESS HISTORY SOCIETY OF JAPAN

経営史学会·Established: 1964
·Number of Members: personal 747, institutional 50·President: Hidemasa MORIKAWA (Keio University)·Publication: Japan Business History Review—quarterly
Japanese Yearbook for Business History---annually·Business History Society of Japan
c/o Professor Eisuke DAITO
No. 711, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo,
7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Doshisha University on November 13-14, 1993.

51

JAPAN SOCIETY OF BUSINESS MATHEMATICS

日本経営数学会·Established: 1959
·Number of Members: 124·President: Yoshio IIHARA (Nanzan University)·Publication: Annual Report of Japan Society of Business Mathematics·Japan Society of Business Mathematics
c/o Professor Yoshio IIHARA, Nanzan University
18, Yamazato-cho, Showa-ku, Nagoya 466, Japan

JAPAN SOCIETY OF COMMERCIAL SCIENCES

日本商業学会·Established: 1951
·Number of Members: honorary 7, ordinary 742, supporting companies 10·President: Yoshihiro TAJIMA (Gakushuin University)··Publication: Journal ofJapan Society of Commercial Science←annually·Japan Society of Commercial Sciences
Kenkyu-to Building, Meiji University,
1-1, Kanda Surugadai, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101, Japan

JAPAN SOCIETY FOR COMMODITY SCIENCE

日本商品学会·Established: 1935
·Number of Members: regular 268 including 11 foreigners, supporting 4·Chairman: Ryojiro IWAKI (Chiba Commercial College)·Publication: Quarterly bulletin, Shahin Kenkyu (Studies on Commodities)·Japan Society for Commodity Sciencec/o Hitotsubashi University,
2-1, Naka, Kunitachi, Tokyo 186, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Seinan Gakuin University on May 15-16, 1993
with the symposium "The Problems of Today and the Influence of Formation Mechanisms
on Commodities."

52

JAPAN ACADEMY FOR CONSUMPTION ECONOMY

日本消費経済学会·Established: 1971
·Number of Members: 328·Chief Representative: Shigeru NISHIMURA (Takushoku University)·Publication: A皿als of the Japan Academy for Consumption Economy·Japan Academy for Consumption Economy
c/o faculty of Commerce, Takushoku University,
3-4-14, Kohinata-cho, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 112, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Hannan University on June 17-19, 1993
under the theme℃urrent Problems on Consumer Issues."

THE SOCIETY OF ECONOMIC SOCIOLOGY

経済社会学会·Established: 1966
·Number of Members: 310·President: Yoichi UTSUMI (Osaka Gakuin University)·Publication: The Annals of the Society of Economic Sociology·The Society of Economic Sociology
c/o Professor Masaki ADACHITHE SOCIETY FOR THE HISTORY OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT

経済学史学会·Established: 1950
·Number of Members: 808·President: Toshihiro TANAKA ( Kwansei Gakuin University)·Publication: The Annual Bulletin of the Society for the His to乃ofEconomic Thought
The History of Economic Thought Society Newsletter·The Society for the History of Economic Thought
c/o Professor Toshihiro TANAKA
School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University,
Nishinomiya 662, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Kanazawa University on November 6-7,
1993 with the symposium "History of Japanese Economic Thought."

53

THE JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMICS ANDECONOMETRICS

理論・計量経済学会

THE JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHERS

経済地理学会·Established: 1954
·Number of Members: 720, patronage members: 10·President: Motosuke ISHII (Meiji University)·Publication: Keizai Chiri Gaku Nempo (Annals of The Japan Association of
Economic Geographers)一quarterly
The Japan Association of Economic Geographers
c/o Division of Economic Geography,
Faculty of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, East Bldg.,
2-1, Naka, Kunitachi, Tokyo 186, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Meiji University on May 29-30, 1993 withthe symposium "Society and "'----"

JAPAN ECONOMIC POLICY ASSOCIATION

日本経済政策学会·Established: 1940
·Number of Member: individuals 1,222, institutional 4·President: Taketoshi NOJIRI (Osaka Gakuin University)·Publication: Nippon Keizai Seisaku Gakkai Nenpo (The Annals of the Japan
Economic Policy Association)-annually·Japan Economic Policy Association
c/o Department of Economics, Kobe University,
2-1, Rokkodai-cho, Nada-ku, Kobe 657, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Keio University on May 29-30, 1993 withthe symposium "A New Socio-economic System of Japan-A Perspective forthe 21st Century."54

JAPAN FINANCE ASSOCIATION

日本経営財務研究会·Established: 1977
·Number of Members: 449·President: Rinya SHIBAKAWA (Hitotsubashi University)·Publication: The Annual Report of the Japan Finance Associatio正annually·Japan Finance Association
c/o Faculty of Business Administration, Kobe University,
2-1, Rokkodai-cho, Nada-ku, Kobe 657, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Aichi

JAPAN ACADEMY FOR FOREIGN TRADE (JAFT)

日本貿易学会·Established: 1960
·Number of Members: 354·President: Yoshio SAITO (Chuo Gakuin University)·Publication: The Annual Bulletin of the Japan Academy for Foreign Trade.
JAFT News-twice yearly·Japan Academy for Foreign Trade
c/o Professor Ryohei ASAOKA
School of Commerce, Waseda University,
1-6-1, Nishiwaseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-50, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Kobe City University of Foreign Studies on
May 21-23, 1993 with the symposium "International Trade in the New Developmentof International Relations."

THE JAPANESE SOCIETY OF INSURANCE SCIENCE

日本保険学会·Established: 1940
·Number of Members: honorary 6 including two foreigners, ordinary 1,034 including 27
foreigners, supporting organizations 65·Chairman: Tatsunori SUZUKI (Waseda University)·Publication: Journal ofInsurance Science (Hoken-gaku Zasshり 一 quarterly·The Japanese Society oflnsurance Science
c/o The Lift Insurance Association of Japan,
3-4-1, Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Kobe University of Commerce on October
16-17, 1993.

55

JAPANESE ASSOCIATION FOR INTERNATIONALACCOUNTING STUDIES
国際会計研究学会·Established: 1984
·Number of Members: 433·President: Kiyomitsu ARAI (Waseda University)·Publication: Kokusai Kaikei Kenkyu Gakkai Nenpo (Annual Report ofJapanese
Association for International Accounting Studies)·Address: Professor Kiyomitsu ARAI
School of Commerce, Waseda University
1-6-1, Nishiwaseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-50, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Waseda University on July 3-4, 1993 withthe symposium℃ooperation on the Standard Setting between Japan and U S A "〗三1—i 11i'i1 ;l 1: 1 1)=r1'1f;1 1 Ilr1 11
i i 1
―

1

11Ttil1:1-:11{1月→|ー

THE JAPAN SOCIETY OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS
国際経済学会·Established: 1950
·Number of Members: individuals 1,141, corporate 21·President: Kiyoshi IKEMOTO (Kobe University)·Publication: Kokusai-keizai (International Economy)-annually·The Japan Society of International Economics
c/o Professor Kazuhiro IGAWANIPPON ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION
日本経営教育学会·Established: 1979
·Number of Members: individual 762, corporate 21·Representative Manager: Masao OSUGA (University of Electro Communications)·Publication: Annals of the Nippon Academy ofManagement Education,
published by the administrative office of the Academy·Nippon Academy of Management Education
c/o Yamashiro Keiei Kenkyujo
4-8-4, lidabashi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Meijigakuin University in July, 1993.

56

THE ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY

経営哲学学会·Established: 1984
·Number of Members: 293·Representative Manager: Mamoru SANO (Aichi Gakuin University)·Publication: Keiei Tetsugaku Ronshu (The Annual Report of the Academy ofManagement Philosophy)· The Academy of Management Philosophy
c/o Keieikanri Jisshu-shitsu, Aichi Gakuin University,
12 Araike, Iwasaki, Nisshin-cho, Aichi-ken, 470-01, JapanTHE JAPAN SOCIETY OF MONETARY ECONOMICS

金融学会·Established: 1943
·Number of Members: 931·President: Toshiya HANAWA (Hitotsubashi University)·Publication: Bulletin of the Japan Society ofMonet町Economic←biannually·Japan Society of Monetary Economics
c/o Toyo Keizai Shinpo-sha,
1-2-1, Hongoku-cho, Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103, Japanon June 5-6, 1993.

THE ACADEMIC ASSOCIATION FOR ORGANIZATIONALSCIENCE

組織学会·Established: 1959
·Number of Members: individual 1,218, company 33·President: Yasuo OKAMOTO (Aoyama Gakuin University)·Publication: Organizational Scienc←quarterly·Academic Association for Organizational Science
c/o Keiei Kenkyujo,
1-36, Kanda Jimbo-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Gakushuin University on June 26-27, 1993

57

JAPAN SOCIETY FOR PERSONNEL AND LABOR RESEARCH

日本労務学会·Established: 1970
·Number of Members: 698·Representative Director: Kyoichi FUTAGAMI (Waseda University)·Publication: Annual Report ofJapan Society for Personnel and Labor Research·Japan Society of Personnel and Labor Research
c/o Professor Kyoichi FUTAGAMI,
School of Commerce, Waseda University,
1-6-1, Nishiwaseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-50, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Kumamoto University of Commerce in June 1993
with the unified theme "Restructuring in the Labor Market and Globalization of JapaneseJAPAN ASSOCIATION FOR PLANNING ADMINISTRATION

日本計画行政学会·Established: 1977
·Number of Members: 1,288·President: Hiroshi KATO (Keio University)·Publication: Planning Administratio『-biannually·Japan Association for Planning Administration
c/o The Institute of Statistical Research,
1-8-16, Shimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Tokyo Institute of Technology in September
1993 with the symposium "Philosophy Policy and Technology for Sustainable

JAPAN SOCIETY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

経済理論学会·Established: 1959
·Number of Members: 1,032·Chief Representative: Mitsuhiko TSURUTA (Chuo University)·Publication: The Annual Bulletin of the Society of Political Economy-annually·Japan Society of Political Economy
c/o Professor Mitsuhiko TSURUTA, Chuo University,742, Higashinakano, Hachioji-shi, Tokyo 192-03, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at The University of Tokyo on October 23-24, 1993.

58

THE POPULATION ASSOCIATION OF JAPAN
日本人口学会·Established: 1947
·Members: 360, honorary 4, special 3·President: Hidehiko HARA (Seijo University)·Publication: Jinkogaku Kenkyu (The Journal of Population Studies)·Population Association of Japan
c/o Institute of Population Problems,
Ministry of Health and Welfare,
1-2-2, Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Tohoku Fukushi University on June 4-5, 1993
with the symposium "Aging and Welfare."JAPAN PORT ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION
日本港湾経済学会·Established: 1962
·Number of Members: 350·Representative Manager: Toshiro KITAMI (Aoyama Gakuin University)·Publication: Kowan Keizai Kenkyu Nenpo (The Annual Report of the JapanPort Economics Association)·Japan Port Economics Association
c/o Yokohama Yamashita-Futo Kowan Kosei Center
279-1, Yamashita-cho, Naka-ku, Yokohama 231, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held in Nagasaki on October 21-23, 1993
with the symposium "South-Eastern Economic Developments and The Roles ofArea Ports and Harbors.

THE JAPAN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC FINANCE(Formerly, JAPANESE ASSOCIATION OF FISCAL SCIENCE)
日本財政学会·Established: 1940
·Number of Members: 643·Chairman: Takehisa HAYASHI (Ryutsu Keizai University)·Publication: Annual Report of the Japanese Association of Fiscal Science·The Japan Institute of Public Financec/o The Institute of Statistical Research,
1-18-16, Shimbashi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 105, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Fukuoka University on October 15-16, 1993.

59

THE JAPAN SOCIETY OF PUBLIC UTILITY ECONOMICS
公益事業学会·Established: 1949
·Number of Members: regular members 387, corporation members 75·Chairman: Tomoji ICHINOSE(lshinomaki Senshu University)·Publication: Journal of Public Utility Economics·Koeki Jigyo Gakkai(The Japan Society of Public Utility Economics)
c/o 1-12-31, Minamiaoyama, Minato-ku, Tokyo 107, Japan.
The next annual meeting will be held at Outemon Gakuin University on June 4-5, 1993.

THE JAPAN SECTION OF
THE REGIONAL SCI.ENCE ASSOCIATION INTERNATIONAL
日本地域学会·Established: 1962
·Number of Members: 563·President: Hirotada KOHNO(University of Tsukuba)·Publication: Studies in Regional Science 一the Journal of the Japan Section of
RSAI(Chiikigaku Kenkyu in Japanese) Vol.22, No.I &No.2-annually·The Japan Section of the Regional Science Association International
c/o Professor Hirotada KOHNO, Institute of Socio-Economic Planning,
Tsukuba University,
Tsukuba, lbaraki 305, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Aoyama Gakuin University on the last thirdof October, 1993.

JAPAN RISK MANAGEMENT SOCIETY
日本リスクマネジメント学会·Established: 1978
·Number of Members: individual 451, supporting 37·Representative Management: Toshiak:i KAMEi(Kansai University)·Publication: ]ARMS Report(Risk and Insurance Management)·Society for the Study of Risk Management
c/o Professor Toshiak:i KAMEi
School of Commerce, Kansai University,
35-3-3, Yamate-cho, Suita-shi, Osaka 565, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Senshu University on September 25-26, 1993.

60

THE SOCIETY FOR THE ECONOMIC STUDIES OF SECU印TIES
証券経済学会·Established: 1966
·Number of Members: 480·Representative: Yoshio KUMANO (Senshu University)·Publication: Annals of the Society for the Economic Studies of Securitie←annually·Society for the Economic Studies of Securities
c/o Japan Securities Research Institute,Tokyo Shoken Kaikan,
1-5-8, Nihonbashi-Kayabacho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Senshu

THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE STUDY IN SOCIALIST ECONOMIES
社会主義経済学会·Established: 1967
·Number of Members: 223·Chief Representative: Minoru NAGASUNA (Kansai University)·Publication: Bulletin of the Association for the Study in Socialist Economie←
annually·Association for the Study in Socialist Economies
c/o Assistant Professor Satoshi MIZOBATA
Kyoto University,
Yoshida-honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-01, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Hokkaido University on May 28-29, 1993
with the symposium "The Tasks of the Transition Comparative Study of Russia,
Eastern Europe and China."

THE SOCIETY FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POLICY
社会政策学会·Established: 1950
·Number of Members: 860·Representative Manager: Yuji KATO (Senshu University)·Publication: Shakai-Seisaku Gakkai Nenpo (Annal of the Society for the Studyof Social Policy)·Society for the Study of Social Policy
c/o Professor Yuji KATO
Faculty of Economics, Senshu University,
2-1-1, Higashimita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 214, Japan.
The next annual meeting will be held at Senshu University on May 10-11, 1993
with the symposium "Theory of Social Policy Revisited."

61

SOCIO-ECONOMIC HISTORY SOCIETY

社会経済史学会·Established: 1930
·Number of Members: 1,161·Representative Director: A趾a HAYAMI (International Research Center forJapanese Studies)·Publication: Shakai Keizai Shigaku (Socio-Economic History)一bimonthly·Shakai Keizaishi Gakkai (Socio-Economic History Society)c/o Professor H. KITO
Sophia University,
7, Kioicho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Aoyama Gakuin University on October 16-17,
1993.

JAPAN STATISTICAL SOCIETY

日本統計学会·Established: 1931
·Number of Members: 1,321·President: Kiyoshi TAKEUCHI (lshinomaki Senshu University)·Publication: Joumal of the Japan Statistical Society-biannually·Japan Statistical Society
c/o The Institute of Statistical Mathematics,
4-6-7, Minami-Azabu, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106, Japan
will be held at Kanazawa

JAPAN SOCIETY OF TRANSPORTATION ECONOMICS

日本交通学会·Established: 1941
·Number of Members: 366 regular including 8 advisory (individual) and 43 special(corporations)·President: Haruya HIROOKA (Hosei University)·Publication: Kotsugaku Kenky" (Annual Report on Transportation Economics)·The Japan Society of Transportation Economics (Nihon Kotsu Gakkai)
c/o Unyu-Chosa-Kyoku,
7-1-1, Ueno, Taito-ku, Tokyo 110, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at Rissho University in October, 1993.

62

NIPPON URBAN MANAGEMENT RESEARCH ASSOCIATION

日本地方自治研究学会·Established: 1984
·Number of Members: individual 264, group 6·Representative Manager: Hiroshi YOSHIDA (University of Marketing andDistribution Science)·Publication: Joumal of Urban Management Research (Annals of Nippon
Urban Management Research Association)·Nippon Urban Management Research Association
7-20, Minami-Ogimachi, Kita-ku, Osaka 530, JapanThe next annual meeting will be held at the University of Marketing and Distribution
Science on September 10-11, 1993.

63

New Membership 1992

JAPAN LOGISTICS SOCIETY
日本物流学会·DATE OF ESTABLISHMENT: 1 June, 1983
·OBJECT雌：The comprehensive study of logistics management·NUMBER OF MEMBERS:

individual 267, corporate 19·REPRESENTATIVE:

Masao UNO (Waseda University)·ANNUAL MEETINGS:
Nation-wide meeting once a year (The next annual meeting will be held at
Senshu University on July 28-30, 1993.)·PUBLICATIONS:The Annual Report of the Japan Logistics Society and Journal of the

Logistics Society published by the administrative office of the society.
·ADDRESS:JAPAN LOGISTICS SOCIETY
c/o Professor Osamu NISHIZAWA

School of Commerce, Waseda University,

1-6-1, Nishiwaseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-50, Japan

64

This Information Bulletin is designed to serve as an introduction of the academic
activities of member associations of the Union to economic societies throughout theworld. Copies will be distributed by the secretariat of the Union to libraries andinstitutions in other countries whose names have been given by member associationsof the Union.