type:text

Many studies have discussed the necessity of the promotion of sports and have been critical of the sport policy of the government. In fact, considering Japan's economic presence, Japanese athletes have been relatively unsuccessful atinternational competitions like the Olympic Games and world championships. Also, Japan is not as replete with programsand facilities for sports activities as Western developed countries. Sports activities have external economies. Therefore, the government is expected to give financial support to promotethem. At the same time, when the government fails to provide these services, it can be criticized. In Japan, administrative bureaucrats at the Sports Bureau of the Ministry of Education have provided and enforced concrete plans concerning sports. Therefore, they are in a position to lead governing bodies like JASA or JOC through their right to allocate sports budgets in the form of subsidies. Some of these individuals work at JASA and JOC as directors after leaving the Sports Bureau. This custom makes it easier for JASA and JOC to realize their needs throughthe Bureau. For bureaucrats, this custom helps to justify their own policies. The government and the LDP have not been deeply involved in the sport policy-making process. They usually confirm the policies provided by the Sports Bureau. At times, however, they have shown strong leadership. For example, they pressured JASA and "JOC to boycott the Moscow Olympic Games in 1980. They also played an active part in introducing "toto", ballot for sports promotion. We can classify sport policies into two groups: Routine type policies and non-routine type policies. This typology will help to illuminate the sport policy-making process because the actors will be different depending on the policy type or policy stages. Policies that maintain the status quo and are mostly guided by bureaucrats are classified as routine type policies. The policy-making process for this type of policy is not clear. In general, the policy-making process undertaken by bureaucrats has been regarded as a black box and has not been analyzed by political scientists. On the other hand, policies that intend to change the present situation or system and are beyond the competence of bureaucrats can be classified as non-routine type policies. For this type of policy, actors like politicians or the mass media take part in the policy-making process. It is inadequate just to talk about the policies that have already been determined or implemented. For a constructive discussion, we also need to analyze the policy-making process.