FPCJ-Home > Media resources > Briefing Report
Go to "Search by News Category"

Briefing Report

Japan’s Science and Technology Basic Policy Report

Minister of State for Science and Technology Policy
Mr. Iwao Matsuda

[Science and Technology] February 10 , 2006

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to talk to you today. First, I would like to tell you what kind of work I am doing. In Japan there are various agencies and ministries within the government. The work of the minister of state for science and technology policy is to harmonize the science and technology policies of the various governmental agencies and ministries and coordinate them. I preside over the monthly meetings held by the Council for Science and Technology Policy, which is chaired by the prime minister and made up of related cabinet members and learned persons. Through this council a national science and technology policy, which goes beyond the scope of the governmental agencies and ministries, is planned, drafted, and comprehensively coordinated.

To be a little more specific, making decisions about the science and technology basic policy, which I will talk about today, is one of my main tasks. To give you one typical example of comprehensive coordination, before any ministry or agency puts a request for a science and technology budget to the Ministry of Finance, I set forth the overall policy (the resources distribution policy). Then, after the ministries make their requests to the Finance Ministry, I rank them according to priority into four groups and have this incorporated into the Finance Ministry’s year-end budget assessment.

That is a rough picture of my work. Last year, at a plenary meeting of the Council for Science and Technology Policy on December 27, the basic policy for science and technology for the next five years was drawn up. I would like to talk about that now.

Final adjustments in this science and technology basic policy are now being made, and by the end of March this will be approved by the cabinet as Japan’s third Science and Technology Basic Plan. I mention that this is the third plan. It was back in 1995 that the Science and Technology Basic Law was established. In accordance with this law, the first Science and Technology Basic Plan was established in 1996 and the second in 2001. Since the current fiscal 2005 is the final fiscal year of the second five-year plan, we are now drawing up the next, third five-year plan. The Council for Science and Technology Policy was created in January 2001 during the drafting of the second basic plan to play the role of control center for science and technology policy promotion. Before talking about the third basic plan, I will briefly talk about the first and second plans.

First of all, with regard to what each of the first two stages exhibited concerning objectives and achievements in research and development investment by the government, the first five-year basic plan from fiscal 1996 to 2000 carried a target of about \17 trillion in government investment for research and development, and the second five-year plan, from fiscal 2001 to 2005, about \24 trillion. The first five-year plan achieved its objective by demonstrating a total investment of \17.6 trillion. But in the second five-year plan the objective of \24 trillion was not reached, as actual investment amounted to \21.1 trillion. However, compared with other policy expenditures, the science and technology budget did achieve high expansion even against a backdrop of unmet economic growth projections and an increasingly austere financial situation.

One particularly important measure in the first five-year plan was to support the strengthening of postdoctoral programs and to increase the number of postdoctoral fellows to 10,000.

In the second basic plan, the strategic prioritization of investment and science and technology system reforms were the two pillars. First, concerning strategic prioritization, together with promoting basic research, research and development investment by the government in areas outside of basic research was divided into eight fields. From these, “primary prioritized areas”―life sciences, information technology, environmental sciences, and nanotechnology and materials ― were established and prioritized for the allocation of resources. Also, in the area of science and technology system reform, the plan aimed at doubling competitive research funds. Competitive research funds are allocated funds from the research budget to selected research proposals gathered through public solicitation and chosen through fair examination. We aimed at doubling this. Competitive research funds increased sharply during the second basic plan and contributed significantly to bolstering the competitive academic research environment.

If we look back at the results of the first two five-year Science and Technology Basic Plans, I think the research standards of our country have steadily improved under this program. As a result of the cumulative investment so far, for example, the level of Japan’s research papers has risen in terms of quality and quantity, and many world-leading study results have appeared.

Moreover, along with the fruits of research and development, newly formed large-scale markets have appeared on the horizon. Breaking out of its long-term stagnation, the Japanese economy is once again beginning to show some life, but we must not forget that behind this lies the fact that science and technology investment over many years has come to fruition and is now leading the economic recovery.

In response to this progress, what does it tell us about the third basic plan and the policy agenda to be tackled for the next five years starting in April of this year? First of all, there are several points we should learn from our experiences during the first two basic plans, but I will only mention a couple of them. The first one is returning the results to the public and society. As I previously mentioned, the fruits of the investments have begun to appear, but voices are mounting universally saying that more of the results of science and technology should be returned to the people and society. Second, due to growing austerity in the financial situation of the Japanese economy, strategically prioritizing investments ― in investment selection and the concentration of distribution ― should probably be strengthened further. Third is the fear that because people’s understanding of and interest in science and technology is fading despite the expanded investment in science and technology, we may lose the support of the people if the present situation continues. I think the third basic plan also has to face these considerations and be able to respond to them sufficiently.

Moreover, a new problem has arisen. Everyone knows that worldwide competition in science and technology is now more intense than ever before. Not just in Western countries but in many Asian countries as well, we have rushed into an era of “knowledge megacompetition.” This can be strongly felt especially in the field of human resources, and I think even a great international scramble for outstanding, talented people has begun.

If you look at the situation both domestically and internationally, domestically we face a shrinking population and the problem of a declining birthrate coupled with a growing proportion of elderly, and internationally there are such global themes as environment and energy problems, the food problem, and so on, that are jostling around, all of which amount to a mountain of problems that science and technology must help resolve.

Under these circumstances, there will be no way for Japanese society, or humankind, to carve out its future other than by relying on wisdom. Since the basis of this wisdom is certainly going to be science and technology, the task of the third basic plan is going to be far more important than the first two. The third basic plan has been completed based on this awareness of the issues. Now I would like to move on to an explanation of the basic policies that became the substance for the plan.

First of all, as the philosophy of the basic policy, we came up with the following two basic stances.

The first is “to promote science and technology to be supported by the public and to benefit society.” Only when science and technology policy earns the understanding and support of the public can it be effectively carried out. It is important to win public understanding and support by strengthening efforts to benefit society through the innovative use of research and development results and by explaining science and technology policy and its impact plainly to the public.

The second is “to emphasize fostering human resources and a competitive research environment.” The foundation of science and technology is people, and the future of creative science and technology for Japan rests on the capabilities of those who will be fostered in Japan and play an active role in our country. We shift the emphasis away from conventional priorities like infrastructure building to the way of thinking that prioritizes investment aimed at fostering human resources and providing them with an active role. Moreover, we want to further strengthen the competitive environment in order to free the creative minds of talented people. In each and every research institution we want to foster researchers, not establishment thinkers, and give their capabilities full play in a competitive research environment that promotes personal initiative and industriousness. We’ve declared “from ‘hard’ to ‘soft’ resources, and greater significance of individuals at institutions” as the key phrase for this basic stance.

In response to this basic stance we have declared 3 “ideas,” 6 “goals,” and 12 “intermediate goals.” [Please refer to the next page (http://www.fpcj.jp/e/mres/briefingreport/bfr_209_02.html).]


Next I would like to talk about how much will be committed in the third basic plan, or the scale of total investment. The austere financial situation in Japan continues today. But due to the crucial importance of its role amid the circumstances just described, science and technology, which is referred to as an “investment for tomorrow,” has again been given great emphasis. In the third five-year basic plan the scope of governmental investment for research and development was set at about \25 trillion.

This figure is calculated as 1% of gross domestic product during the five-year plan, assuming a 3.1% average growth rate for nominal GDP during the period. This was decided after final consultations between the Finance Minister and me, and we think that it shows those both at home and abroad Japan’s stance of stressing itself as “a nation of creative science and technology.”

At the same time, merged into the basic plan and decisively written therein are reforms, such as setting outcome targets for R&D, improving system evaluation, and eliminating overlap in research fund distribution, that maximize investment effect in the implementation of the plan.

Next, in regard to the strategic priority setup in science and technology, namely, the thorough commitment to investment selection and concentration principles, the third basic plan will first of all and steadfastly promote basic research. A variety of points were discussed concerning research and development priorities outside of basic research, such as whether to continue emphasizing the four prioritized fields of the second basic plan, the future impact of individual science and technology projects, the need for continuity as a strategic factor, and the expectations of the public. In the end, it was concluded that prioritizing the four fields of life science, information technology, environmental sciences, and nanotechnology and materials continued to be a valid strategy for the third basic plan and would be implemented. In the third plan the aforementioned four fields were designated as “primary prioritized areas,” and energy, technological craftsmanship, infrastructure, and frontier (outer space and ocean) were designated as “secondary prioritized areas.” Accordingly, it was decided to continue preferential resource allocation to the first four fields.

From the standpoint of further strengthening strategic priorities, the third basic plan makes added efforts in the selection and concentration process within each of the various fields in both the primary and secondary prioritized areas. Within each of the fields that the third basic plan has earmarked for budgetary prioritization, further close investigation will be made in each of the prioritized areas to designate “strategically focused research fields” where budget allocation will be emphasized for the next five years. This work, called “field-specific promotion strategy,” will be finished by the end of March, and the package that will include this work will be set by cabinet decision as the Science and Technology Basic Plan. Then, from among the strategically focused research fields, there will be some especially long-term and large-scale projects chosen by the leadership of the government and designated as “national critical projects.” What exactly are these projects? These are things like outer space development, supercomputers, and oceanic exploration, which are now subjects of lively debate.

Next I would like to talk about science and technology system reforms. The third basic plan shifts emphasis to investing with an eye on human resources and exemplifying the principles of “from ‘hard’ to ‘soft’” and “greater significance of individuals at institutions.” First, in order to encourage young researchers, reforms will introduce schemes to promote self-reliance and provide support; for example, there will be a tenure/track record mechanism that gives the opportunity to do independent research and provides stable employment (tenure) to promising young researchers who have produced fertile results. At the same time, competitive funding for young researchers will be expanded. Second, we have increased opportunities for female researchers by establishing concrete targets, setting a goal of at least 25% new-employment share for female researchers among all natural science fields. The current share, regrettable to say, is just 10%. Third, we must attract outstanding researchers from abroad and provide opportunities for excellent senior researchers. Fourth, we must make research environments more competitive, for example by increasing general competitive research funds and enhancing indirect expenses.

Furthermore, we must implement system reform toward world-class excellence in science and technology. In order to strengthen development in the sciences and in constant innovation, first of all we must work for further reform of the university system and stronger competitiveness in higher education by setting a goal of creating about 30 world- class centers of excellence. Second, “advanced research centers on integrated fields for innovation” will be created as a base of genuine industry-academia-government collaboration and supported in order to provide continuity of assistance from basic research to applied research in the earnest effort of stimulating innovation. Under this concept of ultimately developing new industries through innovation, the number of initially created large industry-academia-government collaborative bases will gradually be pruned to a remaining few. A system of industry-academia-government collaboration from basic research to final innovation will be created that will assume long-term expenditures from the outset.

In order to promote science and technology that is supported by the public, over the next five years we will conduct a national campaign encouraging people to “stand up and embrace science.” The Council for Science and Technology Policy will give its utmost in its capacity as control center to appropriately and steadily put these policies into concrete form.

A moment ago I mentioned that science and technology is not just for the sake of the Japanese people. Through science and technology, answers to problems common throughout the world are being sought. In the third basic plan there is one more prominent feature: to make efforts to further develop international cooperation in science and technology. In specific terms this means promoting an early commencement of ministerial meetings among Asian countries to tackle common themes through policy-related information exchange and tangible cooperation in science and technology.

The way of thinking described in the basic policy has already moved into execution. Recently, from January 15–18, I visited the United Kingdom and France and held discussions with their science and technology ministers. Because each country has, putting it simply, its own “strong fields,” they both indicated an interest in improving cooperation in basic research. At the same time, agreements with France and the United Kingdom were reached to further cooperation in research on common worldwide issues, such as terrorism, which affect the peace and safety of all countries. Preliminary business-level discussions by a joint committee on science and technology are planned with France in March and with the United Kingdom in June.

One of the pillars of the basic policy is the need still remaining today for all countries to cooperate in the field of science and technology in order to resolve problems common to all humanity. Japan has made it its policy that humankind’s happiness will be achieved through science and technology and through peace. Today I have introduced only a small number of the basic elements of the third Science and Technology Basic Plan. I think all countries should cooperate with each other as much as possible to solve issues common to all humankind by sharing their wisdom through science and technology. Thank you for your kind attention.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Q: I have three questions. The first question is, you stated a little while ago that the second basic plan was a success. Were there any aspects that failed? For example, the target was \24 trillion, but the actual budget was only \21.1 trillion. And I have heard it said that the public has lost interest in science and technology. I would like to ask if any aspects of the second basic plan failed. My second question is, I think one of the main points of the third basic plan is human resources. In order to secure human resources from abroad, in concrete terms what kind of good policies will be carried out? For example, there are many talented researchers going to Western countries. What kind of measures will be taken to counter that? My third question is, China announced yesterday its middle- and long-term basic plan. I would like to ask your thoughts on it.

A: Concerning the matter of the second basic plan not reaching its target, in comparison with other expenditures, only the science and technology budget was able to maintain its goal as well as it did. Concerning public interest in science and technology, everyone enjoys the benefits of science and technology. They are actually born from the efforts made through science and technology, but I am sorry to say that the aspiration for the needed effort in continuing innovation is fading. If you think this may be the case only in Japan, the same is being said in both the United Kingdom and France. It is the same now in the United States, too. In contrast, I am envious of the enthusiasm now being shown for science and technology in China. I think this is a big issue for present-day Japan. That is why we are now gathering a lot of information about how to get children to enjoy math and science more instead of being alienated from science. This is also included in the upcoming basic plan. If anyone on China’s side has suggestions we should try, I would certainly like to hear them. Recently the British and French ministers also said, “If there are any ‘good practices’ you are doing that you can recommend, please tell us.” I mentioned some things we were doing here in Japan that I thought might be helpful. In this way we were able to share information through discussions. So if you have something good, please do tell us.

China has also announced a very large plan. Recently in the United States President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address and budget message, and afterward the secretary of energy’s address also, mentioned new science and technology policies, energy policies, and policies on nuclear energy, in all of the advanced nations, including countries like China that are looking to the future and just beginning to spread their wings. The world is now beginning to show great interest in science and technology. As mentioned in this basic policy, and as I just explained for the benefit of humankind now more than ever before we should be cooperating internationally in the field of science and technology and exchanging policy information. That’s why I would like to meet with China’s minister of science and technology now. I would like to discuss these things in detail. China’s science and technology plan just came out yesterday, and I have only read what was in the newspapers. I haven’t read the document itself, so I will refrain from commenting. But looking at its content, it is an amazing plan. I hope they make the most of it. There are probably several fields for cooperation, fields we can work together in ― I do not mean just between Japan and China ― but I think there are probably many fields. In China great emphasis has been placed on such areas as water and energy, the environment and agriculture. There are probably a vast number of areas where our two countries can cooperate. When I looked at what is inside the document, I immediately wanted to meet the Chinese minister.

Concerning the question of accepting foreign researchers, when talking about foreigners entering the country, things like immigration policy are handled by the Ministry of Justice. But this time it has been decided that the Council for Science and Technology Policy, headed by the prime minister, will directly discuss immigration policy matters, too, and so considerations for this have just begun. Therefore, we will draw up a broad policy regarding foreigners that will include, together with immigration policy, such things as the social security system, housing circumstances, and so on. Then we will begin to create an environment allowing foreign researchers to devote themselves wholeheartedly to research and play an active role in Japan.

Q: I would like to ask about something that wasn’t covered. It concerns the role of the private sector in promoting science and technology. Among the members of the Council for Science and Technology Policy I think there are learned specialists with ties to such firms as IBM, Hitachi, Bandai, and others. The fact is that so-called advanced or leading research is also being done at places like NTT, Sony, Toshiba, and so on. How do you think you are going to get the private sector involved in promoting science and technology? Are you considering some kind of concrete measures, such as tax breaks, in order to subsidize this advanced research?

A: In Japan, the role of the private sector is larger than the government’s role. In Japan the proportion of research costs covered by the private sector is one of the largest among all developed nations. In one sense, this naturally means that the private sector will have to continue fulfilling the important role it has been playing until now. Today I didn’t talk much about creating a favorable working environment for the private sector to do productive research, but, of course, this is also included in the plan. For example, R&D and the tax system play important roles as initiatives. The basic policy, or plan, is governmental in nature rather than civil or private. According, the \25 trillion that I mentioned, in a sense the government is telling the people that this is what it is prepared to fork out. In other words, it is encouraging the people, “Do your utmost!”

On the other hand, concerning cooperation between the government and the private sector, in Japan this cooperation ― particularly the cooperative relationship between universities and the industrial sector, or so-called industry-academia-government collaboration ― quickly expanded particularly during the past ten years throughout the first and second five-year plans. For example, ten years ago in Japan the relationship between academia and industry was unimaginably weak. This perhaps was also the case in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere; but anyway this is part of Japan’s history. And so an outstanding result of the first and second basic plans was the extraordinary improvement in industry-academia-government cooperation. Various factors in the background prompted this improvement; for example, from the institutional perspective, one factor was the incorporation of universities. In Japan, the national universities are overwhelmingly strong in science and technology, but in the past the collaboration between the national universities and the industrial sector was very weak compared with the situation in many other countries. That is now in the process of rapid change. And, as I mentioned, in an effort to further accelerate, for example, best use of our universities will be made to stimulate innovation. We will enhance academia-industry collaboration. This is a prominent feature of the third basic plan. Even in Japan, we don’t have the latitude we once enjoyed, so the government can no longer be complacent.

(END)


* Given on February 10, 2006, at the Foreign Press Center/Japan. This paper is reserved for internal use; any reproduction or quotation is forbidden without prior permission from the FPCJ. 　　 ©FPCJ 2006