Researcher Database

Kazuto Suzuki
Faculty of Public Policy Public Policy Public Policy
Professor

Researcher Profile and Settings

Affiliation

  • Faculty of Public Policy Public Policy Public Policy

Job Title

  • Professor

Degree

  • ph.D. on Contemporary European Studies(University of Sussex)
  • MA on International Relations(Ritsumeikan University)

J-Global ID

Research Interests

  • EU   安全保障   ヨーロッパ統合   構成主義   米欧関係   国家戦略   欧州宇宙機関(ESA)   国際協力   欧州統合   政治的意志   欧州連合(EU)   ヨーロッパ総合   制度的柔軟性   Galileoプロジェクト   貿易   欧州宇宙戦略   規制帝国   政策論理   戦略産業   EU拡大   グローバリゼーション認識   技術開発   輸出管理   産業政策   制度の柔軟性   制度ライフサイクル   軍民両用技術   大量破壊兵器   統合   宇宙政策   ヨーロッパ研究   国際政治経済学   

Research Areas

  • Humanities & social sciences / International relations
  • Humanities & social sciences / Politics

Academic & Professional Experience

  • 2011/04 - Today Graduate School of Law, Hokkaido University Professor
  • 2000/10 - 2008/09 University of Tsukuba Department of International Studies Associate Professor
  • 2003 - 2004 北九州大学非常勤講師
  • 2003 - 2004 Department of foreign studies, Kitakyusyu University, Part-time lecturer
  • 2003 - 東京家政学院筑波女子大学非常勤講師
  • 2003 - Department of international studies, Tsukuba Women's College, Part-time lecturer
  • 2000 - 2001 Ritsumeikan University College of Policy Science
  • 2000 - 2001 College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan Univ. Part-Time Lecturer

Education

  • 1996 - 2000  セサックス大学大学院
  •        - 2000  University of Sussex  Sussex European Institute  Comtemporary European Studies
  • 1993 - 1995  Ritsumeikan University  Graduate School of International Relations
  • 1990 - 1993  Ritsumeikan University  College of International Relations
  •        - 1993  Ritsumeikan University  Faculty of International Relations

Association Memberships

  • European Union Studies Association (EUSA:米国)   日本政治学会   日本国際政治学会   日本EU学会   

Research Activities

Published Papers

  • 鈴木 一人
    外交 = Diplomacy 外務省 ; 2010- 40 74 - 79 2016/11 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    中東研究 中東調査会 2015 (3) 15 - 23 0910-5867 2016/01 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    海外事情 拓殖大学海外事情研究所 62 (3) 31 - 45 0453-0950 2014/03 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    国際安全保障 国際安全保障学会 ; 2001- 41 (1) 44 - 59 1346-7573 2013/06 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    アジ研ワールド・トレンド 日本貿易振興機構アジア経済研究所研究支援部 19 (4) 16 - 21 1341-3406 2013/04 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    アステイオン 阪急コミュニケーションズ (79) 190 - 195 2013 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    年報公共政策学 北海道大学公共政策大学院 = Hokkaido University Public Policy School 0 (6) 139 - 158 1881-9818 2012 [Not refereed][Not invited]
     
    This article discusses the chronological development of EU's energy security policy and its problems. Because energy security is primarily a responsibility of national governments, the European Union (European Commission in particular) was not able to formulate unified energy policy. But at the same time, due to the lack of natural energy resources, EU member states needed to cooperate in order to increase bargaining power against energy rich regions such as Middle East or Russia. The problem of international negotiation became clear when Russia and Ukraine increased the political tension, and in order to secure supply of natural gas from Russia, EU launched the discussion with Green Paper which resulted the first comprehensive energy policy in 2007. Furthermore, the "Energy 2020", a new policy document suggested the necessity for EU to influence the process of rules- and standard-making to secure the free trade environment for energy resources. However, the division of competence between member states and EU still make it difficult to formulate comprehensive energy policy. Furthermore, dynamic change of international environment such as "Arab Spring" and Russo-Ukraine conflict, and different reactions and interests of member states complicated the EU strategy for energy rich regions. This structural contradiction of EU's energy security policy implies that EU may not be hegemonic power in international arena, but their role as a giant consumer of energy would have a power to shape international energy market.
  • 鈴木 一人
    外交 外務省 11 (0) 126 - 131 2012/01 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    海外事情 拓殖大学海外事情研究所 59 (11) 49 - 65 0453-0950 2011/11 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    中央公論 中央公論新社 126 (4) 188 - 195 0529-6838 2011/04 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    北大法学論集 北海道大学大学院法学研究科 62 (1) 137 - 139 0385-5953 2011 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    International relations 日本国際政治学会 (162) 9 - 23 0454-2215 2010/12 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • Suzuki Kazuto
    International Relations JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 2010 (162) 162_9 - 23 0454-2215 2010 [Not refereed][Not invited]
     
    Borders play important roles in the so-called Westphalian system where sovereign-nation states divide global space and co-exist. Borders determine to what geographical extent the political power, economic regulations, language and social relations influence on the people and activities. Concurrently, when national borders are established, a modern capitalist market economy becomes the dominant economic system. The capitalist system was developed under the sovereign state system because each state needed to develop its own economy mainly through mercantilist policies. Thus, for a long time, borders functioned as a political, legal and economic barrier to the outside world.<br>However, globalization changed the concept of border. Increasing transaction of money, goods, migration and information seem to undermine the function of borders. However, this article argues that this massive cross-border transaction happens because of the separation of political, legal and economic spheres. Money, goods and people move because they seek preferential exchange rates, interest rates, wages and purchasing power. These differences stem from differences in political, legal and economic systems, and it can only be possible if borders divide a geographical sphere. In other words, "borderless" or cross-border activities happen only in a "borderful" world. This article addresses the case of European integration and scrutinizes the role and meaning of borders in Europe, where market integration is more advanced, but still there are various national systems have remained to control the market.<br>In this analysis of political economy of borders, it employs two different analytical concepts of borders. The first is the ontological border: the physical existence at the edge of a geographical territory. The second is the institutional border: legal and conceptual borders that do not necessarily require physical existence, such as cyber space control or extraterritorial taxation.<br>Although the role and meaning of border has changed due to globalization, it only happened at the ontological border, and the institutional border remains unchanged. Even in the EU, states maintain a certain level of control because they are responsible for internal affairs (particularly security and employment) and refuse outside intervention. There is a clear distinction between ontological and institutional borders: the integration of Europe certainly transformed the nature of borders from physical barriers to a geographical line, but EU member states maintain their legal and political jurisdiction to use institutional borders for protecting their society. These findings suggest that it is necessary to distinguish the concept of border by its functions, and researchers need to take into account changes in the roles and meanings of border.
  • 鈴木 一人
    Hokkaido journal of new global law and policy 北海道大学グローバルCOEプログラム「多元分散型統御を目指す新世代法政策学」事務局 2 141 - 159 1883-342X 2009/07 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    The Hokkaido law review 北海道大学大学院法学研究科 60 (2) 459 - 480 0385-5953 2009 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    ラチオ 講談社 (6) 102 - 122 2009/01 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    The Journal of international security 国際安全保障学会 36 (2) 51 - 74 1346-7573 2008/09 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    海外事情 拓殖大学海外事情研究所 56 (3) 33 - 51 0453-0950 2008/03 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    公明 公明党機関紙委員会 (14) 40 - 45 2007/02 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    国際安全保障 国際安全保障学会 34 (3) 25 - 48 1346-7573 2006/12 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    年報政治学 木鐸社 2006 (2) 150 - 177 0549-4192 2006 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    国際政治 日本国際政治学会 (141) 149 - 159 0454-2215 2005/05 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • SUZUKI Kazuto
    International Relations JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS (141) 149 - 159 0454-2215 2005 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 鈴木 一人
    The Journal of international security 国際安全保障学会 32 (2) 73 - 98 1346-7573 2004/09 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • SUZUKI Kazuto
    EC studies in Japan The European Union Studies Association-Japan 2004 (24) 67 - 95,311 1884-3123 2004 [Not refereed][Not invited]
     
    Since mid-1990s, the capability gap between Europe and the United States became explicit and many in Europe, particularly in France, Britain, Germany and Italy, recognized the necessity to "fill the gap" to be able to make Europe's own decisions. However, because of financial constraints, difference of strategic positioning, and national industrial and technological interests, it was difficult to achieve a consensus among European countries.<br>However, the industry realised the danger of fragmented national defence market and uncoordinated industrial structure. Thus, large European defence companies, notably those "national champions", merged and created EADS. The emergence of this large European company was expected to inprove its competitiveness vis-à-vis American industry, but it also threatens small and medium-sized companies in Europe. Also national governments lost their initiatives to negotiate with industry on prices and requirements for their strategic planning. Therefore, it put pressure for European governments to coordinate their R & D and procurement policies for regaining the negotiation power.<br>This endeavour started outside of the EU policy framework. In 1996, WEU created WEAO for common defence research and development, including non-Member States from Central and Eastern European countries. But larger Member States were not satisfied the arrangement at WEU because it was based on the principle of <i>juste retour</i>, a deliberate mechanism to support uncompetitive companies in smaller Member States to survive. Thus, France, Germany, Italy and Britain formed OCCAR for common procurement and LoI for rejecting the idea of <i>juste retour</i>. Also major satellite owner countries formed BOC to increase reconnaissance capability.<br>On the other hand, within EU framework, there have been several challenges to enhance the policy scope for defence industry issues. Three communications from the Commission in 1996, 1997, 2003 and STAR21 report were clear manifest of Commission's intention to intervene. Also following the establishment of European Rapid Reaction Force, there has been the discussion of European Capability Action Plan, initiated by the Commission, to strengthen European defence technology and industrial capability through EU policy frameworks. Furthermore, among the discussions of European Convention, the creation of European Armaments, Research and Military Capabilities Agency (ARMC) was decided. It was intended to be the centre of defence R & D and procurement issue in Europe, inclusive to all Member States. It was thought that the EU is going to lead the policy for defence industry.<br>However, the enlargement may cause problems for the process to improve European capability. Not only candidate countries are technologically less developed, but also they may claim their share of industrial return through the principle of <i>juste retour</i>. This may slow down the process and put negative effect for catching up with US capability.<br>Thus, it is necessary to introduce the concept of flexible integration. However, current arrangement.for decision-making is based on the "structured cooperation" which excludes Member States without willingness or capacity. This is not an appropriate structure because it would increase the dissatisfaction of smaller Member States including new Members, and it would complicate the decisionmaking process. The important factor is, while larger Member States promote their programmes to increase capability, there should be a system to provide industrial incentives for smaller Member States to satisfy their industrial and technological demands.
  • 鈴木 一人
    筑波法政 筑波大学社会科学系(法学・政治学) (34) 45 - 81 0388-6220 2003/03 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 「欧州統合における柔軟性概念に関する研究・序説
    『筑波法政』 第34号、p.45-p.81  2003 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 'L'Espace et L'Opinion Publique au Japon'
    HERMES No.34 pp.93-103  2002 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • SUZUKI Kazuto
    EC studies in Japan The European Union Studies Association-Japan 2002 (22) 第22号 132-157頁 - 157,361 1884-3123 2002 [Not refereed][Not invited]
     
    European space policy has been dealt by European Space Agency (ESA) rather than EU framework. However, since the latter half of 1990s, the European Union became more involved in the making of space policy for Europe. This article examines the importance of current approximation of institutional relationship between ESA and EU. In doing so, this paper introduces the "policy logic" approach as the analytical framework and discusses its application to the analysis of European space policy, and then focuses on the historical accumulation of institutional differences of the two organizations and the difficulties of creating new system of cooperation through the formulation process of the "European Strategy for Space (ESS)" and Galileo project.<br>In the first phase of institutional development, European space development was separated from EEC/Euratom framework for three reasons: experience of founding fathers in the establishment of intergovernmental organization, CERN; strategic importance of space activities; and the membership of the most advanced country in Europe, Britain. The institutional characteristics of ESA can be described in two aspects the optional participation and the principle of <i>juste retour</i>. These two characteristics give wider freedom for member states in participating and contributing to the space programs. In other words, member states can choose programs according to their policy logics.<br>However, since 1988, European Commission became interested in taking some responsibilities in European space policy because of its involvement in R & D activities. In the early 1990s, European Commission made many attempts to increase its influence on space programs but these efforts were not effective because it challenged the "logic of technology" on which ESA has concentrated. Then the Commission aimed to promote the "logic of commerce" through fostering applications and space market.<br>This change initiated the new development of institutional affiliation of ESA and EU. The paramount moment was to adopt the ESS document in 2000. This document focuses on the logics of technology, commerce and military of which both organizations could contribute jointly. The Galileo program which associated the ESS was also decided in 2000 ESA and EU Councils, however, the program contains variety of difficult questions. Firstly it is the relationship with the US, which aims to monopolize the GPS system; secondly, the question of security issues where many member states were quite sensitive in dealing with; thirdly, the question of finance; and finally, the institutional difference between ESA and EU.<br>Through the analysis of historical development of European space policy and the ESS/Galileo issues, this paper concludes that the approximation of institutional relationship between ESA and EU would not result the integration of the two organizations in near future. Member states would prefer to maintain the ESA institutional arrangement in order to secure the implementation of their policy logics, and even if space policy is included in the EU policy area, the policy making system will remain as it is in ESA.
  • SUZUKI Kazuto
    Policy science 立命館大学 8 (3) 113 - 132 0919-4851 2001/02 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 国際協力体制の歴史的ダイナミズム : 制度主義と「政策論理」アプローチの接合-欧州宇宙政策を例にとって-
    政策科学 8 (3) 113 - 132 2001 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • ミッテラン政権の経済政策とフランスの欧州政策
    日本EC学会年報 (16) 73 - 100 1996 [Not refereed][Not invited]
  • 1981年から1991年までのミッテラン政権における欧州政策の変遷
    立命館国際研究 8 (2-3) 205-222,343-362  1995 [Not refereed][Not invited]

Books etc

  • 鈴木 一人, 神里 達博, 吉岡 斉, 田窪 雅文, 蟹江 憲史, 大島 堅一, 佐藤 丙午, 加藤 朗, 土屋 大洋 
    岩波書店 2015 (ISBN: 9784000287579)
  • 遠藤 乾, 板橋 拓己, 戸澤 英典, 上原 良子, 細谷 雄一, 川嶋 周一, 橋口 豊, 鈴木 一人 
    名古屋大学出版会 2014 (ISBN: 9784815807672)
  • 吉田 文和, 荒井 眞一, 深見 正仁, 藤井 賢彦, 小篠 隆生, 出利葉 浩司, 林原 博光, 鈴木 達治郎, 鈴木 一人, 大井 通博, 佐伯 浩 
    北海道大学出版会 2012 (ISBN: 9784832967779)
  • 遠藤 乾, 鈴木 一人, 中村 民雄 
    日本経済評論社 2012 (ISBN: 9784818821910)
  • 鈴木 一人 
    岩波書店 2011 (ISBN: 9784000222174)
  • 鈴木 一人 
    岩波書店 2011 (ISBN: 9784007303937)
  • 細谷 雄一, 君塚 直隆, 益田 実, 小川 浩之, 芝崎 祐典, 橋口 豊, 齋藤 嘉臣, 遠藤 乾, 力久 昌幸, 鈴木 一人 
    勁草書房 2009 (ISBN: 9784326351442)
  • 遠藤 乾, 板橋 拓己, 戸澤 英典, 上原 良子, 細谷 雄一, 川嶋 周一, 橋口 豊, 鈴木 一人 
    名古屋大学出版会 2008 (ISBN: 9784815805838)
  • 鈴木 一人 
    Ashgate 2003 (ISBN: 0754630145)
  • Japanese Remote Sensing Policy at Crossroad
    K. M. O'Connell, J. C. Baker, and R. A. Williamson (eds.) Commercial Observation Satellites: At the Leading Edge of Global Transparency RAND/ASPRA publications 2001
  • Government Intervention in the Commercialization of Launch Services : Japan and Europe
    The Space Transportation Market : Evolution or Revolution?, Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000
  • Government Intervention in the Commercialisation of Launch Services: Japan and Europe
    M. Rycroft (ed), The Space Transportation Market: Evolution or Revolution Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000
  • Government Intervention in the Commercialization of Launch Services : Japan and Europe
    The Space Transportation Market : Evolution or Revolution?, Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000
  • Japanese Remote Sensing Policy at crossroad
    Commercial Observation Satellies : At the leading Edge of Global Transparency RAND 2000
  • Political Economy of Eurpean Industrial Policy : Expansion of the policy share to high-tech industrial policy
    Contemporary International Political Economy Horitsu-Bunka Sha 1998
  • 欧州産業政策の政治経済学:先端技術開発政策への統合領域の拡大
    『現代の国際政治経済学:学際知の実験』法律文化社 1998
  • Political Economy of Eurpean Industrial Policy : Expansion of the policy share to high-tech industrial policy
    Contemporary International Political Economy Horitsu-Bunka Sha 1998
  • Immanuel Wallerstein : The World-System Theory in contemporary World
    Contemporary Political Theorisis Horitsu-Bunka Sha 1997
  • I.ウォーラーステイン:現代世界における世界システム論
    『現代の政治理論家たち』法律文化社 1997
  • Immanuel Wallerstein : The World-System Theory in contemporary World
    Contemporary Political Theorisis Horitsu-Bunka Sha 1997
  • A Gerealogy of Nation-State
    Aoki Shoten 1997
  • 田口 富久治, 鈴木 一人 
    青木書店 1997 (ISBN: 4250970051)

MISC

Awards & Honors

  • 2012 Suntory Foundation Suntory Prize for Social Sciences and Humanities
     Space and International Politics 
    受賞者: SUZUKI Kazuto
  • 2007 Japan Association for International Security Best Article of the Journal for Young Contributors
     France and ESDP 
    受賞者: SUZUKI Kazuto

Research Grants & Projects

  • グローバリゼーションによる主権国家体系の変容
  • 多国間外交における政策決定メカニズム
  • 現代ヨーロッパ研究 欧州宇宙政策協力に関する研究
  • Changes of Sovereign-State System by Globalisation
  • Policy-making Mechanism in multiolateral diplomacy and International Organisation
  • Contemporary European Studies on European Space Collaboration

Educational Activities

Teaching Experience

  • 自主研究Ⅱ
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 学士課程
    開講学部 : 国際
  • Seminar in Foreign Language Ⅱ
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 修士課程
    開講学部 : 法学研究科
    キーワード : 国連安保理 北朝鮮制裁 核不拡散 大量破壊兵器 国際秩序 国際の平和と安全 インテリジェンス
  • 公共政策特別研究ⅡA
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
  • International Political Economy
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 修士課程
    開講学部 : 法学研究科
    キーワード : グローバリゼーション、国際秩序、主権国家システム、金融のグローバル化、生産のグローバル化、安全保障構造のグローバル化、市民社会とメディアのグローバル化、通貨危機、多国籍企業、テロリズム、ポピュリズム
  • 公共政策特別研究Ⅰ
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
  • Inter-Graduate School Classes(General Subject):Humanities and Social Sciences
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 修士課程
    開講学部 : 大学院共通科目
  • Comparative Law and Politics
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 修士課程
    開講学部 : 法学研究科
    キーワード : グローバル化 国家 社会 官僚制 政策決定過程 国際政治経済 世論形成過程 グローバル経済 貧困問題 アジアの安全保障 環境問題 メディアと権力の関係
  • Issues in Foreign Language Ⅰ
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 博士後期課程
    開講学部 : 法学研究科
    キーワード : 国連安保理 北朝鮮制裁 核不拡散 大量破壊兵器 国際秩序 国際の平和と安全 インテリジェンス
  • Applied Foreign Language Seminar
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 学士課程
    開講学部 : 法学部
    キーワード : 国連安保理 北朝鮮制裁 核不拡散 大量破壊兵器 国際秩序 国際の平和と安全 インテリジェンス
  • Basics of Humanities and Social Sciences
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 学士課程
    開講学部 : 全学教育
    キーワード : 権力、秩序、制度、政策過程、官僚制、政党、選挙、安全保障、外交
  • Seminar II
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 学士課程
    開講学部 : 法学部
    キーワード : グローバル化 国家 社会 官僚制 政策決定過程 国際政治経済 世論形成過程 グローバル経済 貧困問題 アジアの安全保障 環境問題 メディアと権力の関係
  • Technology Policy
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
    キーワード : 科学技術、テクノロジー・アセスメント、国土開発、環境技術、宇宙政策、原子力安全、エネルギー政策、自然再生エネルギー、防災政策、廃棄物処理・管理、インフラ整備、安全規制、技術基準
  • Applied English Seminar Ⅰ
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
    キーワード : 国連安保理 北朝鮮制裁 核不拡散 大量破壊兵器 国際秩序 国際の平和と安全 インテリジェンス
  • International Public Policy
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
    キーワード : 国家、主権、国際秩序、国際関係、国際レジーム、環境問題、エネルギー問題、軍縮・不拡散、人口問題、難民問題、地域統合
  • Topics on International Policy Ⅱ
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
  • International Political Economy
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
    キーワード : グローバリゼーション、国際秩序、主権国家システム、金融のグローバル化、生産のグローバル化、安全保障構造のグローバル化、市民社会とメディアのグローバル化、通貨危機、多国籍企業、テロリズム、ポピュリズム
  • Seminar on International Political Economy
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 専門職大学院
    開講学部 : 公共政策学教育部
    キーワード : グローバル化 国家 社会 官僚制 政策決定過程 国際政治経済 世論形成過程 グローバル経済 貧困問題 アジアの安全保障 環境問題 メディアと権力の関係
  • International Public Policy
    開講年度 : 2018
    課程区分 : 法科大学院
    開講学部 : 法学研究科
    キーワード : 国家、主権、国際秩序、国際関係、国際レジーム、環境問題、エネルギー問題、軍縮・不拡散、人口問題、難民問題、地域統合


Copyright © MEDIA FUSION Co.,Ltd. All rights reserved.