Page 173 - Global Political Economy_Understanding The International Economic Order

CHA PTER S EVEN
point that the three major economic agencies responsible for foreign
affairs frequently have differing foreign economic policies that con-
flict with those of the other agencies. Although bureaucratic struggles
exist in every country, Japan does not have a powerful executive and
therefore has no easy way to resolve such conflicts. In addition, the
strong belief of the Japanese in consensus decision-making permits
and even encourages stalemate and indecision. Indeed, during much
of the postwar period the weak executive branch was of little conse-
quence because of the agreement within the Japanese political elite
on the path that all should follow. By the late 1990s, however, it
became clear that the weakness of the Japanese executive had become
a serious obstacle to Japan’s ability to deal with its difficult economic
and financial problems.
Another distinctive feature of Japanese society is that many “pub-
lic” responsibilities have been assumed by the private sector. For ex-
ample, private corporations carry a major responsibility for the social
welfare of a substantial portion of the Japanese population. Whereas
the American government delegates regulatory authority to quasi-au-
tonomous public agencies, Japan delegates much of the responsibility
for policing business activities to private business associations. This
has been a highly pragmatic practice based on the close ties and mu-
tual trust between private business and government. There is a partic-
ularly interesting example of this practice in the delegation of public
functions in the privatizing of “law and order.” One reason for the
low level of street crime in Japan is that the yakuza (the Japanese
Mafia) police the streets in exchange for police toleration of their
businesses.
This practice of self-regulation and self-policing by business and
other private associations is intended to provide social stability and
ensure fairness. However, it does result in special treatment of partic-
ular groups, seemingly arbitrary decisions, and discriminatory behav-
ior; this practice of self-regulation is also directly counter to the
American concept of universal rules that apply equally to everyone
regardless of status. Cultural differences in the definition of “fairness”
have been a major source of American-Japanese economic tension
that has, on occasion, erupted into open conflict. The Japanese prac-
tice of private associations assuming essentially public responsibilities
has raised significant problems in the integration of Japan into the
world economy. For cultural and other reasons, the Japanese find it
virtually impossible to incorporate outsiders into the self-regulating
associations that set the rules governing competitive behavior and
other aspects of the conduct of business in Japan, while foreign com-
160