![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.research.kyoto-u.ac.jp\/app\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2019\/04\/cat-b2-img01.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nGraduated from Kyoto University\u2019s Department of Electrical Engineering II in 1976. Completed Kyoto University\u2019s doctoral program in 1981. PhD (engineering). After working as an Assistant at Kyoto University\u2019s Radio Atmospheric Science Center and Instructor and Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Engineering, in 1998 he became a Professor in the Graduate School of Informatics\u2019 Department of Communications and Computer Engineering. He does research on indoor environmental measurement using UWB radars as well as on radar signal processing (atmospheric remote sensing, etc.). He is a fellow of the Institute of Electronics, Information, and Communication Engineers of Japan, and a member of the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan; Japan Society for Aeronautical and Space Sciences; Society of Geomagnetism and Earth, Planetary and Space Sciences; Archaeological Prospection Society of Japan; IEEE, and American Meteorological Society.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
The 2007 \u201cDeclaration of Equality\u201d<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Sato: Let\u2019s begin by talking about labels. Research office work is based on the university teaching faculty job class definitions found in Article 92 of the School Education Act. It underwent major revisions in 2007\u2014the biggest in the seventy years since the end of World War II. Until then, assistant professors (joky\u014dju)<\/em> and assistants (joshu)<\/em> had been defined therein as people who help professors (ky\u014dju)<\/em>. Assistants used to speak self-deprecatingly of themselves, saying that they were not researchers but just lowly helpers. However, it then changed to be like it is today: professors, associate professors (junky\u014dju)<\/em>, and associate lecturers (joky\u014d)<\/em>. Item 6 defines professors, Item 7 associate professors, and item 8 associate lecturers. Interestingly, their text is completely the same. Professors are defined as \u201cindividuals with particularly outstanding knowledge, abilities, and achievements\u201d and associate professors as \u201cindividuals with outstanding knowledge, abilities, and achievements.\u201d Associate lectures don\u2019t have the \u201coutstanding\u201d part. This is actually very important. While there are differences in terms of their experiences, they all have \u201cknowledge, abilities, and achievements\u201d and it is their job to \u201cteach students, guide them in their research, and engage in research.\u201d In other words, we have a declaration of equality that the work duties of professors, associate professors, and associate lecturers are completely the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sato: I then became Dean, and having been involved in solving problems between researchers (harassment and so on), I think that many professors are completely unaware of this. In fact, before the major revisions, there was a ten-year time span in which the average age of teaching faculty rose by ten years. After World War II, the number of research posts, particularly those in engineering, rapidly increased, and then this all of a sudden stopped. From then onwards was a time when ages just increased. Perhaps it is because people still have an attitude from this era, but there is still a very strong sense, even amongst people who became professors after the revisions, that they have the right to make the decisions about, for example, how research group funds are used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While companies are pyramids, their structure\u2014who has the authority to give what kind of orders and who exists above these people\u2014is clear. However, universities are like public markets where everyone has their own individual stall, so to speak. Professors are like the head of the market\u2019s board of directors, facilitators who bring everything together. Everyone\u2019s equal. While it depends on the place, there are differences in how people are treated in accordance with their abilities. In many key graduate school departments, professors having the right to make personnel decisions is rationalized\u2014groups of \u201cparticularly outstanding\u201d people are allowed to make the decisions. However, professors don\u2019t actually have rights when it comes to the operations of research offices. Since the basis of everything is only Article 92, particularly younger scholars need to understand that professors asserting anything more is a mistake. Materials submitted in response to public employment calls are like contracts, and those selecting candidates also do their best to read them very closely. What\u2019s written has to be implemented, and I also think that one can use what\u2019s written as a basis when responding to things that are not written in them. However, when the professor is unaware, unproductive clashes occur. If one experiences being in a leadership or management position from which one has to solve problems, there are opportunities to refer to laws regarding these things. However, it is highly likely that professors who have not had this experience are unaware of this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sato: I say \u201cunproductive\u201d because even if an ethics committee issues recommendations, the problem is handled based on the personnel division\u2019s strict arrangements, and all parties involved are satisfied, insofar as this kind of awareness is not shared by everyone, fundamental problems will remain in the research group. Having equal rights also means that it\u2019s important for all members to see themselves as members of a community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sato: What\u2019s interesting about this report is whether it is a good thing to get people into fields that are expected to grow in the future. Today, the national government provides a massive amount of research funds for such fields. Research offices that have this kind of funding continually obtain research funds that members would almost never be able to acquire normally, and they try to continually produce results that are the best in the world within a set period of time. I think that this is an important role of universities. However, this competitive framework goes completely against the philosophy of Article 92; it\u2019s working under top-down management towards an objective, like a company. Therefore, while professors want to say that people can do the research that they like, there are fields that one can do nothing in alone, and if associate professors and associate lecturers each were able to do their own topics, then people would no longer be able to work. This is why full-time staff hired with research funds for a specific project is necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While motivations for teaching courses differ depending on the scholar, being able to do so depends on whether teaching and research are seen as rights or contractual responsibilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sato: There are a lot of people who see being hired for a specific project as one step in their career, expecting that they\u2019ll be hired for a permanent position next. This image is correct, and things are actually done in this way. However, thinking realistically, it\u2019s not that easy. We can see that it would be impossible for there to be no project-specific posts that provide the labor for large research projects. However, this ratio should be the opposite of what it is. This is because the number of chances for people to be absorbed at some point into higher job classes from such posts decreases. Professors are driving a vehicle, so they hire scholars to provide such labor. However those hired almost have no right to select their own research topic, and it\u2019s hard to think that a post at a major university will open up for the majority of them. This relates to what we were talking about before. While the approach of the government using tax money to engage in focused investment is fine, this shouldn\u2019t make up the majority of research funding, and it\u2019d be a mistake to shrink other fields by doing so. With that said, there are lots of posts at engineering departments because they are expected to do work that will be useful in the world, and they have a duty to meet such expectations. However, I would like it if in this context each scholar tried to think about what is important. For example, the number of posts for foundational research in engineering is being rapidly reduced right now. However, if this field is not cultivated then the future of \u201cimmediately useful research\u201d will also be wiped out. This way of thinking only comes from scholars themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sato: Universities would be unable to do \u201cimmediately useful research.\u201d People who want to do it could do it at companies or national research institutes. Since what is \u201cuseful\u201d and the like can\u2019t be known until thirty years later, research is very inefficient. If inefficiency is not allowed, then research at universities doesn\u2019t work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In postwar Japan there was no focused investment and research funds were only fixed-amount operations grants. Five to six million yen. Research was done with this, and while professors and younger researchers had an apprenticeship relationship, there was freedom. However, now it\u2019s an era in which equipment that costs hundreds of millions of yen is necessary when one wants to do something. Productivity cannot be increased like it was in hunter-gatherer Society 1.0 or agricultural times.3<\/sup> Since one cannot buy equipment with operations grants, there are fields in which people need to compete to acquire funds. 2007\u2019s major reforms grew out of the need to protect scholars\u2019 human rights amidst the repercussions of things having gotten tighter due to funding primarily going to large projects. Scholars must each keep in their mind that things getting tighter for professors should not translate into straitjackets for young people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sato: When it comes to both problems in research groups and concerns regarding education, I think that there is a need for a non-research organization that one can get advice from. While there are some young people who only talk about rights, instead of going to mediation immediately, I first think that there\u2019s a lot that can be improved by first having people from such an organization objectively introduce examples from a variety of research offices. It\u2019d be great if universities could set up this kind of service. With regard to education, since we probably can\u2019t expect that know-how will be acquired from professors as it has been in the past, it\u2019d probably be best to actively use university resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With regard to education, first try applying for research funds to get money. I think that by doing so one will acquire the information and ways of thinking needed to work as a scholar at a university. This is the first step for determining how you\u2019re going to live as a scholar. When writing an application you will probably experience culture shock, finding out what you lack. You\u2019ll probably come to understand when being assessed by others that to live as a researcher is not to do what one wants. When it comes to research topics as well, insofar as it is not project research, there will be no other scholars working on the same topic as you, no companions, at your university. Since academic associations today are rapidly becoming subdivided, dive in\u2014there will be someone doing something very similar. If there is no one in Japan, then look to oversees. Please go outside of your university\u2014the networks that one creates when one is young will later serve as a base. Problems like expensive equipment that I mentioned earlier might be able to be addressed with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If one chooses the profession of a scholar, one needs to be prepared to in the end do things on one\u2019s own. If one is not prepared to do this, then I think it would be better to be a company researcher. While company researchers basically have no freedom, instead they have a good environment. There is money and equipment. This also means that there are goals to be reached. Conversely, it might be good to support scholars who came to universities from companies because it is said there is a need for scholars to be able to engage in management that is unrelated to research and development funds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (Interviewer: Asa Nakano)<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1<\/sup>See the distributed materials from the Ministry of Finance Fiscal System Council\u2019s October 24th, 2018 meeting: https:\/\/www.mof.go.jp\/about_mof\/councils\/fiscal_system_council\/sub-of_fiscal_system\/proceedings\/material\/zaiseia301024.html<\/a> (in Japanese).<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2<\/sup>Based on materials from the Japan Association of National Universities 2017 academic year basic materials catalogue (01\/30\/2018): https:\/\/kaiin.janu.jp\/member\/shiryo\/<\/a> (in Japanese).<\/p>\n\n\n\nUniversities Are Like Public Markets<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Everyone wants to comfortably do their research and not have unproductive fights.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Each Scholar Doing Their Own Research<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
A recent report1<\/sup> was issued which said that despite younger researchers being detached from professors in 2007, this did not lead to people freely trying out research in fields that can be expected to grow.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
As a result, the percentages of scholars under forty at national universities who are hired for specific research projects and those who are not have flipped in the past ten years.2<\/sup><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Say that the ratio of scholars was returned to what it was ten years ago. What would happen?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Scholars Are Solitary Beings: Being Prepared To Do Things On One\u2019s Own<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
There are also some scholars encountering difficulties in research offices in which the professor is not around and for all intents and purposes it\u2019s just them.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n