NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
TOKYO REGIONAL OFFICE

June 21, 2002

The National Science Foundation's Tokyo Regional Office periodically reports on developments in Japan that are related to the Foundation's mission.  It also provides occasional reports on developments in other East Asian countries.

Tokyo Office Report Memoranda are intended to provide information for the use of NSF program officers and policy makers; they are not statements of NSF policy.

The following report was prepared by Kazuko Shinohara, Scientific Affairs Assistant in the National Science Foundation’s Tokyo Regional Office.  The opinions expressed in this report are Ms. Shinohara’s and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.  Ms. Shinohara may be reached at kshinoha@nsf.gov.

One year has passed since the “Toyama Plan” brought a shock to academic circles and other concerned people in Japan.  Whereas it has recently been renamed as “COE [Center of Excellence] Program for the 21st Century” to make the points of the Plan clear, it has remained controversial especially in academic circles.  When the Toyama Plan was released on June 11, 2001, a Japanese newspaper article said that it has emerged just like a “black ship”.  While Japan was still secluded in the 1800's, U.S. Commander Perry  knocked on the door in 1853 all of a sudden with his black convoy fleet.  Since then a black ship in Japan means a sign which brings a nation-level drastic change.

Appeared So Suddenly?

The Toyama Plan was named after Minister Atsuko Toyama, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT).  The Plan was prepared by MEXT and submitted to the Council on Economic and Fiscal Policy (CEFP), which is chaired by the Prime Minister, whose objective is to revitalize the stagnant Japanese economy.  It is reportedly said that the Plan was prepared in a week right after a meeting between the Prime Minister Koizumi and Minister Toyama.  This is the first point of controversy: that it should not have been prepared in just one week.  A second point of controversy is that a university reform plan should be a separate matter from revitalization of the economy, i.e., the market principle should not be applied to university education.

From the following three points of the Plan it is easy to estimate the size of the shock it has given to academic circles:

(1) To drastically promote reorganization and consolidation of national universities:
[Scrap and Build]

(2) To introduce management methods used in the private sector to the management of national universities:
[Quick Shift to Independent Administrative Organizations]

(3) To introduce a competitive principle to universities by means of external evaluation:
[Top 30 universities]

The Plan was, in fact, prepared quickly and for the purpose of making contributions for revitalizing the economy.  On the other hand, it might have been that the time had already been ripe to let such a plan emerge.

First, whereas there are 99 national universities in Japan which have been managed and protected by the government as a convoy fleet for the past 50 years or more, convoy fleet-type management has come not to work any more in the current era of globalization from the administrative, financial and political viewpoints.  It has become obsolete.

Second, after WWII, the higher education institutions in Japan were forced to go through a large-scale reorganization and consolidation.  Then, during the past 50 years many new universities have been born (there were only seven Imperial Universities at the end of WWII, which then become national universities), along with rapid economic growth, without any blueprint which oversees the whole picture of the universities in Japan.  The U.S., U.K, Australia and China have already gone through a large-scale reorganization and consolidation of higher education institutions in 1980's and 1990's to be ready for the 21st century of global competition.

Third, in the age of globalization, the establishment of internationally competitive institutions are called for everywhere in the world.  Higher education and science and technology are key for every country to survive in the 21st century.  Under such circumstances, it is cost effective for the government to make research investments to a limited number of universities rather than investing equally to all the universities.

Already Budgeted and Scheduled for JFY 2002

Some reorganization and consolidation began after the Toyama Plan was released and, as a matter of fact, some of the negotiations have already been completed and others are going on.  Also, MEXT began to hasten the procedure to shift the national universities to independent administrative organizations, the target time of which is JFY2004.  The principal controversy was how to select the top 30 universities among the current national, public and private universities.  On January 17, 2002 MEXT renamed the plan as the “COE Program in the 21st Century” in an attempt to dodge further controversy and came up with further details of the Program.

The description of the COE Program states that MEXT does not intend to rank universities, but rather to select universities in particular fields by peer review.  Universities will begin submitting proposals from the middle of June and the final decision will be made in late September.  For the first year they have already selected five fields and will select the best 10-30 universities in each of those fields by peer review.  The number of universities to be selected will depend on the review results.  The five fields in the first year are:

Life Science
Chemistry, Materials Science
Information, Electrics, Electronics
Human Literature
Interdisciplinary, New Areas

MEXT has also selected five fields for the second year, JFY2003:

Medical Science
Mathematics, Physics, Earth Science
Mechanical, Civil, and Construction Engineering
Social Science
Interdisciplinary, New Areas

As seen above, Human Literature was included as one of the fields, whereas it has been another controversial point that the focus would be made only on science and engineering fields and not on human literature at all.

A budget of Yen 18.2 billion (ca. US$147 million) has been allocated for the COE Program in JFY2002.  Each of the selected universities will receive somewhere between Yen 100 to 500 million per year for five years, with an interim review after the first two years.

MEXT has also established a Committee for Promoting the COE Program in the 21st Century.  Its members are listed in Attachment I, the sample use of grant funds is given on the Attachment II, and the points to be considered in the peer review are on Attachment III.

Thus, the reform has been implemented as one of the many reforms taking place in almost every aspect of the Japanese system.  50 years after the War, these reforms must be inevitable for Japan to survive in a globally competitive age.

Sources:
Phone interview with and materials obtained from University Reform Division, Higher Education Bureau, MEXT

Newspaper articles: Nikkei, Asahi
Article by the Research Institute for Independent Higher Education
NHK Interview with Minister Atsuko Toyama
Article by a RIETI fellow
Monthly Comments - Obunsh

Attachment I

Attachment II

Example for the Use of the Grant

To invite world-top level researchers

To conduct research for Ph.D. course students

To support young researchers, e.g., training assistants, research assistants, postdoc

To make collaborative research with world top level universities overseas

To hold symposia and workshops

To employ research assistants

To purchase necessary equipment

To obtain research space

To establish lab overseas

To promote research in general

Attachment III

Points to be Considered in Peer Review

1.         Fact Sheet for research and education activities

-             Whether the research and education activities are excellent by the world's standard in the designated field

-             Whether the research and education activities have the potential required to perform the plan for becoming COE

-             Whether the institution will be able to reach the world's standard in the future, whereas the current research and education activities are not sufficient enough.

2.           Future Plan and Plan to become COE

-             Whether the institution plans to become a COE by the world's standard under the management by the President of the institution

-             Whether the content of the Plan to become a COE is intended to have the institution to be of the world's standard

-             Whether the Plan to become a COE is trustworthy and realistic, and is intended to be active as a COE

-             Whether the Plan describes how to become COE where young researchers can independently show their ability

-             Whether the Plan includes a system where students will be able to be active as important resources in the future

-             Whether creative and epoch-making research results can be expected

-             Whether the Plan to become a COE is understood as the strategy of the whole institution

3.           Rationale of the Proposed Budget

-             Whether the content of the proposed budget is reasonable and indispensable to pursue the plan.

Click to return to NSF/Tokyo homepage