KJC Korea
Journal Central

Japan has been struggled with many problems such as interaction between globalization and regionalism, aging population combined with the decreasing number of children, increasing income inequality among regions and financial crisis. Especially, low birthrate and longevity are the factors which cause social security funding and international competitiveness to the lower level. Based on the recognition above this study shows effects which aging has on economic structure. Although aging has been rapidly proceeding in Japan, each province shows different speed of aging. The purpose of this study is to analyze the structural changes in regional economic growth in those circumstances. Conclusions of the study are shown as follows: First, the relationship between economic growth rate and productivity of regional population growth rate is positive(+). It shows that aging have an impact on the regional economic growth structure. Second, even though regions in Japan show different levels of the problems in the industrial structure, the serious problems are sprung from the regions where the aging is faster. Third, while the manufacturing industry which contributed to the economic growth has been disappearing, the service industry has been growing. In short, industrial structure will be reorganized around the metropolis on account of the population aging, and the structure of the regional economic growth factor has been converted to regional factors from industry structure factor.

At the close of China's 18th Party Congress as well as the 12th National People's Congress, the new leadership under Xi Jinping assumed power for the next 10 years. Facing the growing necessity to respond to a number of internal and external challenges in accordance with its foreign policy objectives, China's new leadership is expected to pursue 'responsible power diplomacy' while simultaneously continuing its aggressive moves such as the military buildup. With regard to U.S.-China relations, the two countries are likely to continue to show the repeating patterns of cooperation and conflict, even though China has recently begun to promote ‘a new type of great power relationship’ with the U.S. in an attempt to forge mutually beneficial relations based on close dialogue and cooperation. Regarding China's maritime disputes on its periphery, China is likely to maintain a hard-line stance to defend its 'core interests'. However, China is also seeking to pursue more sophisticated and balanced approaches in foreign policy by placing equal emphasis on diplomatic measures as reflected in its 'charm offensive' policy. In the wake of North Korea's third nuclear test, the international community is paying closer attention to China's North Korea policy. But, it still remains to be seen if the Chinese government signals a shift from the current strategic dilemma and seeks other alternative approaches to manage and ultimately resolve Pyongyang's nuclear problems. Under this circumstance, the ROK government should prevent any potential spill-over effects stemming from the deteriorating U.S.-China relations on the Korean Peninsula. Similarly, it is equally important for Seoul to increase a possibility that the cooperative and collaborative relationship between the U.S. and China contributes toward achieving the ROK's strategic objectives, which include the maintenance of peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, denuclearization of North Korea and development of inter-Korean relations. At the same time, the ROK government should maintain a strategic balance between the ROK-U.S. alliance and the ROK-China strategic cooperative partnership as well. In particular, the ROK government needs to take advantage of China's 'responsible power diplomacy' in its policy toward China and prepare its own strategic leverage against Beijing's assertive behavior in foreign policy. Moreover, the ROK should also upgrade the existing strategic dialogue at the vice foreign ministerial level with China to further strengthen strategic bilateral cooperation in the coming years.

The US in 2010 proclaimed of its return to Asia as the cornerstone of its foreign policy in the 21st century. The implications of the policy is to reiterate America’s commitment to Asia and to let Asia know that the US holds a strong stake in the region. As part of its efforts, the US has delivered a more specific measures as in building an “architecture” in the region. This architecture concept is extended to America’s strategic thinking on the prospective regional order against the rapid rise of China. The main framework of the concept is to be founded on multilateralism, coupled with bilateralism as supplementary. However, a series of statements and foreign policies indicate that the true foundation of the architecture is bilateralism based on value sharing and alliance. While China’s own conceptualization of multilateralism fundamentally differs from that of the US, China’s bilateralism is also driven by different means, i.e. “common interest.” From this perspective, the paper concludes conceptual conflict in these concepts will be the driving force behind conflicts and instability in the bilateral relationship between the two regional giant states.

This paper highlights the situation with Far East development which rose to the most important issue on the Russian government agenda. The paper is structured according to the logic of SWOT analysis. Russian Far East represents a very big territory where economic activity is unevenly dispersed and cannot be balanced in principal. Regions vary in type of resources they have, climatic conditions and geographical positions. Unfortunately, transport infrastructure does not facilitate trade not to mention development. It is needless to say that state of industry in the Far East has deteriorated during transition years. Despite all the revenues from export of resources all the regions rely heavily on state subsidies for their everyday life. Lack of funds, on one hand, restricts freedom of regional governments to undertake development programs and on the other hand induces unproductive competition between the regions for state financing. There are numerous threat for development in the international environment as well. Asian region where Russian Far East is located is highly competitive. It is true both for manufacturers as well as for resource producers. Although Russia does possess a lot of resources, not everybody is ready to buy them. Those export relations that they have are heavily concentrated on neighboring China and Korea, to a lesser degree on Japan. In order to overcome existing obstacles, it is necessary to develop such a program that would allow some flexibility and divergence from the national development model; some room for domestic consumption. Also integration into Asia region should proceed not only in the economic sphere but also in culture, science. As an alternative, government should adjust plans for lesser number of population concentrating on industries with higher value-added. It is also important that these policies would not be abandoned after some time as it was the case many times before.

The starting point in this paper is what only certain partial works among a lots of Korean wave drama, are popular in the Southest Asia. What the word “certain” means isn’t related with the material, but the type. This paper confirmed in the dimension of typical category that the Korean classical narratives are reproduced in a group of the Southeast Asian Korean wave drama. What is the standard dividing the category, is the types of the Korean classical novel. It fixed the standard of the category as cheongisoseol(傳奇小說)· jaehagainsoseol(才子佳人小說)· Kongjuee Patjuee cheon(콩쥐팥쥐전)· yeoseongyeongungsoseol(女性英雄小說)· yeongungsoseol(英雄小說). This paper classified the Southeast asian Korean wave drama into the above five categories and discovered the typical characteristics of the each type in it. The finding is what only certain partial works among a lots of korean wave drama, is popular in the Southest Asia n the memory of the narrative code that Korea and the Southeast Asia shared in the medievaltimes.

This paper approaches corporate social responsibility as a discourse and explores how as public sphere discourse CSR has become a trend among American corporations. It questions how corporate social responsibility has been promoted as a topic worthy of public debate and how it is made into something that companies should respond to. To attend to these questions in a cultural and linguistic anthropological fashion is to attend to the way CSR as discourse involves social actors who in their everyday work and interactions use speech—and in this case, writing—to engage in socially meaningful actions with one another. How can corporations come to ‘have’ responsibilities and perform responsible actions as ‘single’ entities? It is only through talks about the social relationships and roles of corporations that such framing is possible. By examining who the major actors are in the promotion of CSR as a public sphere discourse and revealing the method by which their discussions about the relationship between corporations are society are made relevant to corporate actors, this paper hopes to provide an understanding as to how corporate social responsibility has emerged as a sociological phenomenon in the United States of America (and possibly abroad).