Local government - Chihojichi

Japanese: 地方自治 - ちほうじち

In a broader sense, it refers to the autonomous decision-making and management of public affairs within a certain area of a country by the residents of that area. In this sense, it also includes the politics of Greek city-states and autonomous cities from the late Middle Ages. However, the issue of local autonomy today is that of modern nations. In this sense, local autonomy refers to a political form in which the territory of a nation is divided into numerous local governments, and the authority to govern those areas within a certain area is given to those local governments, with that authority being handled by the local residents. It is also called a local system. Under current law, in Japan, it refers to the autonomy of prefectures, cities, towns, villages, and special wards.

[Takagi Shosaku and Tsujiyama Yukinori]

The Significance of Local Autonomy

It was only after the modern nation-state that local autonomy in this sense became institutionalized and important. This is because modern nation-states are based on the two political principles of separation of powers and representative government. Along with the separation of the three powers of the legislative, judicial, and executive branches at the central government level, they also divide authority between the central government and local governments, and have a mechanism to prevent the abuse of power by mutual checks between the central and local governments. Furthermore, if central government officials were to handle all public affairs within a country, they would tend to ignore the circumstances of each region and handle them uniformly across the country as instructed by the central government, which would cause dissatisfaction and resentment in each region and make the country unstable. Furthermore, under such a mechanism, even problems that individual regions could solve on their own would become the responsibility of the central government, which would increase the burden on the central government and prevent it from fully fulfilling its original responsibilities. In order to avoid such situations, local governments were established.

The reason why local autonomy is important is not just because it is a decentralized system for curbing the harmful effects of centralization and the abuse of power by the central government. Local autonomy involves local residents participating in the creation and implementation of policies in their local governments, making use of the special circumstances of each region, discussing and reaching agreement among themselves, and resolving and dealing with local public issues at their own discretion and responsibility. Furthermore, many residents gain experience in the management of local governments close to them, and thereby come to understand democracy. In this sense of training in democracy, local autonomy also has great political significance.

[Takagi Shosaku and Tsujiyama Yukinori]

Local Government in the UK

However, for local autonomy, which plays an important role, to develop, local governments must have the authority and financial resources to handle their affairs independently, while the central government must not be unduly involved in or control local governments in their actual operations. It is also important that the local residents have the ability and judgment to manage local governments fairly and appropriately, and that they must learn and train to do so. Therefore, the reality of local autonomy varies depending on the historical background and political conditions of each country, and it has not necessarily developed smoothly. In general, the United Kingdom is said to be a country where local autonomy has developed. Since the unification of the country in the 11th century, the central government has governed the country by appointing centrally appointed sheriffs to the counties, which have been local divisions since ancient times. In the 13th century, due to financial needs, the king gathered representatives of the economically influential people of the counties and boroughs (cities) to discuss the imposition of taxes. This meeting was held frequently afterwards, and it became the origin of the British Parliament. In the 14th century, county sheriffs were selected from the residents of the counties, and they were also given judicial powers. These were the magistrates, who were selected from the landed aristocracy, the same class as the members of parliament who represented the counties. Furthermore, after the Industrial Revolution, the middle class became the center of parliament, and the system changed to a modern one in which local governments were run instead of the privileged magistrates. In this way, through a system in which members of parliament and local administrative officials are selected from the same class, the national parliamentary system and local autonomy are organically linked, and the system has been formed and developed historically. In continental European countries that lacked this historical background, monarchs used their power to break the division of power among the privileged powers, unified the nation, reorganized the local divisions, established local governments, and established a system in which the central government bureaucrats controlled them. England did not create such a centralized system and tradition.

However, even in countries with a history of decentralized systems such as the UK, the central government is now increasingly involved and controlling local governments in terms of administration and finance as central and local administrative activities expand. Furthermore, there is a trend toward centralization, with small and disparate local governments being merged and reorganized into wider areas and local government authority being transferred to the central government. In response to these trends, the need to change centralized administrative and financial structures to decentralized ones and to strengthen the autonomy of local governments and the self-governance of residents has become an issue for advanced industrial countries.

[Takagi Shosaku and Tsujiyama Yukinori]

Local Government in Japan

Japan's modern system of local autonomy was formed in the middle of the Meiji era. It was a system in which central government officials supervised the operation of local governments (self-governance) by wealthy and educated notables in the region, and many of the affairs handled by local governments were delegated to them by the national government. Therefore, in reality, local governments also had a strong character as subordinate organizations to the central government.

After the Second World War, the local government system was fundamentally reformed, and the Constitution of Japan made local autonomy an important element of the parliamentary governance structure, strengthened the independence of prefectures and municipalities, and expanded citizen participation in local government elections and operations. However, the administrative authority and financial resources of local governments were not reformed to an independent local government system, so in reality the central ministries were involved in and controlled the operations of local governments, and local governments tended to depend on the central government, and this relationship between the central government and local governments has continued and has even been strengthened since then.

Through this centralized administrative and financial system between the central and local governments, the high economic growth policy from the 1960s onwards was promoted. On the other hand, the distortions that accompanied economic growth increased, and the interests and concerns of residents changed and diversified due to the progress of urbanization, leading to a dramatic increase in resident movements that criticized and demanded improvements to the content and management of local government policies. Faced with this situation, local governments also focused on promoting policies closely related to the lives of residents, such as environmental conservation and development, and welfare, and began to experiment with methods of resident participation. In the 1970s, new movements in local autonomy emerged and public interest increased. Against this backdrop, there was an emphasis on the need to decentralize the centralized administrative and financial system and to reform it so that local governments could manage their affairs independently through resident participation. In the 1990s, along with the relaxation of government regulations, calls for decentralization increased. Following the unanimous adoption of the "Resolution on the Promotion of Local Autonomy" by both the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors in June 1993, the Decentralization Promotion Committee was established in 1995. The Committee positioned this reform as the "third reform" following the Meiji Restoration and postwar reforms, and listed the following reasons for promoting local autonomy: (1) the institutional fatigue of the centralized administrative system, (2) responding to the changing international community, (3) correcting the overconcentration in Tokyo, (4) forming local communities with distinctive personalities, and (5) responding to an aging society and a declining birthrate. Based on the recommendations of the Committee, the government passed the Omnibus Local Autonomy Law in the ordinary Diet session of 1999, which included amendments to 475 laws. The main points of the law were, first of all, the abolition of the Agency Delegated Affairs System, which increased the autonomy of local governments that had been under the guardianship of the central government, and local administration was to be run based on the principles of "self-determination" and "responsibility to govern oneself" of the region. Ten years later, in 2009, a new government was established led by the Democratic Party, which made "regional sovereignty" one of its main policies, and attention is now focused on the future of local autonomy.

[Takagi Shosaku and Tsujiyama Yukinori]

Edited by Omori Ya and Sato Seizaburo, "Local Governments in Japan" (1986, University of Tokyo Press) ▽ "Local Decentralization and Local Government Confederations" by Tsujiyama Yukinobu (1993, Keibundo) ▽ "Local Decentralization and Local Autonomy" edited by Nishio Masaru (1998, Gyosei) ▽ "Local Autonomy in Contemporary Japan" edited by Imamura Tonobu (2006, Keibundo) ▽ "Local Autonomy in Japan" by Tsuji Kiyoaki (Iwanami Shinsho) ▽ "New Local Autonomy Law" by Kaneko Hitoshi (Iwanami Shinsho) ▽ "Will Local Governments Change?" by Matsushita Keiichi (Iwanami Shinsho)

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

広い意味では、国内の一定地域の住民が、その地域における公共事務を自主的に決定し処理することをいう。この意味では、ギリシアの都市国家、中世末の自治都市の政治なども含まれる。しかし現在、地方自治として問題にされているのは近代国家の場合である。その意味で、地方自治とは、国家の領域を多数の地方自治体に区分し、国家から一定範囲内で、その地域を統治する権限を地方自治体に与え、それを地域住民によって処理している政治形態をさす。地方制度ともよばれる。現行法上、日本では、都道府県と市町村・特別区の自治をさしている。

［高木鉦作・辻山幸宣］

地方自治の意義

この意味の地方自治が制度化され重要性をもつようになってきたのは、近代の国民国家以降のことである。それは、近代の国民国家が権力分立と代議制の二つの政治原理を基礎にしていて、中央政府段階における立法・司法・行政の三権分立と並んで、中央政府と地方自治体の間にも権限を区分し、中央と地方の相互の抑制により、それぞれの権力濫用を防ぐ仕組みとしているからである。さらに、中央政府の役人が国内の公共事務をすべて処理することになると、中央政府の役人は各地域の事情を無視して中央からの指示どおり全国一律に処理しがちになるので、各地で不満や反発が生じ、国内が不安定になりやすい。また、そのような仕組みであると、個々の地域だけで解決可能な問題までも中央政府の責任となり、中央政府の負担が大きくなって、本来の責務が十分に果たせないという事態にもなる。そのような事態を避けるためにも、地方自治体を設けているのである。

　地方自治が重要であるのは、そうした中央集権の弊害や中央政府の権力濫用を抑制するための地方分権的な仕組みということだけによるものではない。地方自治は、地域の住民が地方自治体における諸施策の作成や実施に参加し、それぞれの地域の特殊事情を生かしながら、住民相互が協議し合意を得て、自分たちの判断と責任において地域の公共的な諸問題を解決し処理することである。そして、多くの住民が身近な地方自治体の運営を通じて、そのような経験を積むことにより民主主義を体得していくことにもなる。この民主主義の訓練という意味からも、地方自治は重要な政治的意義を有しているのである。

［高木鉦作・辻山幸宣］

イギリスの地方自治

しかし、重要な役割をもつ地方自治が発展するためには、制度的に地方自治体が自主的に事務を処理できるだけの権限と財源を有すると同時に、実際の運営において中央政府が不当に地方自治体に対して関与、統制せず、また地方自治体を公正かつ適切に運営できる住民の能力や判断、そのための学習や訓練が重要な要件となる。したがって、地方自治の実際は、各国の歴史的な背景や政治的な条件によって相違し、かならずしも順調に発展してきたとは限らない。一般に、地方自治が発展してきた国といわれているのがイギリスである。イギリスは、11世紀に国家の統一が行われて以来、中央政府は、古くから続いてきた地方区画のカウンティに、中央の任命した長官を配して国内を統治してきた。13世紀に、財政上の必要から、王はカウンティやバラ（都市）の経済的有力者の代表を集め、課徴金の賦課を協議させた。この会議は、その後もしばしば開かれ、それがイギリス議会の起源となった。14世紀に、カウンティの長官をカウンティ内の住民から選任するようになり、それに裁判権も与えた。これが治安判事で、治安判事はカウンティを代表する議会議員と同じ階層の土地貴族から選ばれた。さらに産業革命後は、市民階級が議会の中心になり、特権的な治安判事にかわって地方自治体を運営する近代的な制度へと転換してきた。このように、議会の議員と地方の行政担当者とが同じ階層から選ばれる仕組みを通じて、国の議会制と地方自治とを有機的に結び付けて、歴史的に制度を形成し発展させてきたのである。こうした歴史的背景を欠いたヨーロッパ大陸の諸国は、君主が強権によって特権的諸勢力の割拠状態を打破して国家を統一し、地方の区画を再編成して地方自治体を設け、それを中央政府の官僚が統制する制度にした。こうした中央集権的な仕組みと伝統を、イギリスは生み出さなかった。

　しかし、イギリスのような分権的な制度の歴史を有する国も、中央・地方の行政活動が増大してきた現在では、行財政の面で中央政府の地方自治体に対する関与や統制が強まっている。さらに、規模が小さく、大小不統一の地方自治体を広域単位に統合・再編成したり、地方自治体の権限を中央政府に移すなど、中央集権化の傾向がみられる。こうした動向に対して、集権的な行財政の構造を分権的なものに改め、地方自治体の自主性と住民の自治を強めていく必要が、先進工業諸国の課題となってきた。

［高木鉦作・辻山幸宣］

日本の地方自治

日本の近代的な地方自治の制度は、明治の中期に形成された。それは、地方の財産と教養のある名望家による地方自治体の運営（自治）を、中央の官吏が監督する仕組みで、地方自治体の処理する事務の多くは国から委任された事務であった。したがって、地方自治体も実質的には中央政府の下位団体的な性格が強かった。

　第二次世界大戦後、地方制度が根本的に変革され、日本国憲法により、地方自治は議会制の統治構造の重要な要素となり、都道府県や市町村の地方自治体の独立性が強まり、地方自治体の選挙や運営に対する住民の参加が拡大された。しかし地方自治体の事務権限や財源については独立した地方自治体の制度に改革されなかったため、実際には地方自治体の運営に対して中央各省が関与、統制し、地方自治体も中央政府に依存しがちで、そうした中央と地方の関係がその後も継続し、むしろ強化されてきた。

　この中央と地方の間の集権的な行財政の仕組みを通じて、1960年代以降の高度経済成長政策は推進された。その反面、経済成長に伴うひずみが増大し、また都市化の進行により住民の利害や関心も変化し多様化したことから、地方自治体の施策の内容や運営に対する批判・改善を求める住民運動が激増した。こうした事態に直面して、地方自治体も環境の保全や整備、福祉など住民の生活と関係の深い施策の推進に力を注ぎ、住民参加の方式を試みるようになり、1970年代は地方自治に新しい動きも生じ、一般の関心も高まってきた。そうした動きを背景に、集権的な行財政の仕組みを分権化させ、地方自治体が住民の参加を通じて自主的に運営できるように改める必要が強調されてきた。1990年代に入り、政府規制の緩和と並んで地方分権の要請が高まった。衆参両院が全会一致で「地方分権の推進に関する決議」（1993年6月）を採択したのを受け、1995年（平成7）に地方分権推進委員会が設置された。同委員会はこの改革を明治維新・戦後改革に次ぐ「第三の改革」と位置づけ、地方分権推進の理由として(1)中央集権型行政システムの制度疲労、(2)変動する国際社会への対応、(3)東京一極集中の是正、(4)個性豊かな地域社会の形成、(5)高齢社会・少子化社会への対応を掲げた。政府は同委員会の勧告に基づき475本の法律改正を内容とする地方分権一括法を1999年通常国会で成立させた。その要点はまず第一に機関委任事務制度の廃止にあり、これにより中央政府の後見的監督のもとに置かれてきた地方自治体の自律性を高めるとともに、地域における行政は地域の「自己決定」と「自ら治める責任」とを原則として運営されることになった。その10年後の2009年「地域主権」を主要政策の一つに掲げる民主党を中心とする新政権が樹立され、地方自治の行方にも関心が集まっている。

［高木鉦作・辻山幸宣］

『大森彌・佐藤誠三郎編『日本の地方政府』（1986・東京大学出版会）』▽『辻山幸宣著『地方分権と自治体連合』（1993・敬文堂）』▽『西尾勝編著『地方分権と地方自治』（1998・ぎょうせい）』▽『今村都南雄編著『現代日本の地方自治』（2006・敬文堂）』▽『辻清明著『日本の地方自治』（岩波新書）』▽『兼子仁著『新地方自治法』（岩波新書）』▽『松下圭一著『自治体は変わるか』（岩波新書）』