Immigration as a source of
renewal in Japan
By JOHN HAFFNER(This
article, which fist appeared Jan. 19, 2010, at PolicyInnovations.org
is reproduced here in Eyes on Japan by kind permission of the
author.)
Japan's population is on a downward slope, a
trend which causes analysts no small amount of concern. As the Japanese
government warned in a report a few years ago, "The speed with which
the birth rate is falling is creating a situation that undermines the very
foundations of society, the economy and the sustainability of local
communities." From its current population of more than 127 million,
and extrapolating from current trends, the country may shrink to 100 or 90
million people by 2050.
Perhaps more important in economic terms is
the narrowing of Japan's demographic pyramid: Whereas 11 workers supported
two retirees in 1960, the ratio was four workers to one retiree in 1999,
and by 2050 the UN projects that only 1.7 workers will support one
retiree. Those workers will face a heavy burden. A McKinsey study predicts
that Japanese households will be no better off in 2024 than they were in
1997: "The continual improvement in living standards the Japanese
have enjoyed during the last half-century will come to an end."
In theory, Japan could counteract this
decline through increases in immigration, but this is easier imagined than
done. To stabilize the population at its current level, Japan would need
to increase the immigrant population from about two million—the lowest
proportion of foreigners of any OECD country—to roughly 17 million
immigrants by 2050. Put differently, whereas it now admits in the order of
50,000 immigrants a year, it would need to admit something like 650,000 a
year instead.
Even if such a dramatic increase is unlikely,
there are good reasons for Japan to admit many more immigrants in the
coming decades.
Arguments for more immigration
There are at least four reasons why Japan
should admit more immigrants. First, Japan urgently needs a new taxpayer
base given the population inversion as described above. Its debt will soon
exceed 200 percent of its GDP, its pension system is significantly
underfunded, and even its much lauded medical system is headed towards
major cost challenges with its aging and long-lived population. Also, many
of its rural regions especially anticipate shortages of workers and
taxpayers. It is difficult to see how an ever-shrinking workforce will
generate the productivity and growth needed to address this range of
looming concerns.
Second, Japan's capacity to create new
wealth—as measured by start-ups and other measures of
entrepreneurship—has atrophied. Immigrants would bring a fresh
entrepreneurial spirit and capability: new business ideas, new sources of
capital, and new global connections. In an increasingly interdependent
world, immigrants' global connections could counteract the disadvantage
Japan has with its cultural homogeneity.
Third, immigrants would bring greater
facility with languages other than Japanese, including English, the global
lingua franca. Despite its enormous wealth and the great literacy of its
population, Japan has consistently ranked at the bottom in TOEFL scores
among Asian countries. This is not for lack of trying: By one estimate
Japan's ESL industry is $20 billion per year. Immigrants with native
English language facility—not just from the West but also from places
like Ghana and the Philippines—would bring improved linguistic
competence and a more diverse classroom environment. Fourth and finally,
there are arguments from the perspective of the immigrants themselves: of
opportunities for a better life, of remittances sent home to assist family
members, of personal fulfillment and expression through mobility and
career development.
Arguments against more immigration
Arguments against greatly increased
immigration in Japan can be divided roughly into what might be
characterized as right-wing and left-wing concerns.
One right-wing worry is that admitting more
immigrants would harm Japanese culture by diluting or even degrading it.
But Japanese culture is dynamic, not static, and it has always been
influenced in significant ways by other cultures and immigrants. As its
population drops and ages, moreover, many aspects of Japanese culture may
wane in the absence of new generations to renew them. But if millions of
immigrants are given economic opportunities in Japan, there would be more
people studying Japanese, filling empty seats in its universities, and
renewing Japanese arts and sports. In Japan's Open Future, my co-authors
and I point to the example of the Chinese American artist Liga Pang, who
has done so much to revitalize the Sogetsu Ikebana school. Pang powerfully
demonstrates how immigrants can renew aspects of Japanese culture.
A second right-wing worry is that immigrants
would cause a spike in social tensions and crime. The concern about social
tensions has some validity: Japanese and immigrants would need to learn to
live together; immigrants would need to adapt to customary norms while
Japanese would need to be tolerant of differences. But the challenge is
not insoluble. The concern about foreigners and crime, meanwhile, is
highly distorted and exaggerated in Japan. As Mabuchi Ryogo of Nara
University points out, for example, crimes by foreigners are almost five
times as likely to be covered in Japanese media as crimes by Japanese. The
law-abiding majority of immigrants would bring benefits far outweighing
the downside of occasional social tensions and criminal behavior.
The left-wing standpoint, meanwhile, starts
not by excluding outsiders but by promoting the idea of a smaller country.
If Japan drops to a population of 100 million or less, the country will
have a significantly smaller environmental footprint and lesser use of
resources than it does now. And if it manages to drop its population while
maintaining its wealth, it will be able to set an example for a world
headed towards overpopulation and overconsumption. In this spirit some
environmentalists in Japan look favorably on what are being called
"herbivores" in Japan: men who have grown up in the post-bubble
era who consume few products and have little interest in dating women.
Herbivores point to the idea a much less carbon-intensive society.
But this interesting argument champions a
smaller good over a larger one. Given the enormity of the global climate
problem, especially in Asia, and given Japan's energy and environmental
expertise, the world needs Japan contributing solutions. But a smaller
Japan without its economic house in order would be a country unlikely to
contribute very much. In a word: Japan's smaller footprint would be a
lesser contribution than if it fully applied its capabilities toward the
global climate challenge. The point is even more obvious when we recall
that the immigrants in question—even if they are not in Japan—would
still be living somewhere else, adding their carbon footprint to the
global atmospheric total.
Significant immigration increase
unlikely
Alas, even if there is a strong case for more
immigration, it is unlikely that Japan will embark on a bold expansion. It
seems more likely that Japan will only tinker with its immigration levels.
For one thing, the cultivation of the fear of
foreigners is not a new phenomenon: It goes back centuries. More recently
the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which held a monopoly on power for
many decades, capitalized on and reinforced a popular fear of foreigners
in some of its policies. And even those immigrants who are admitted are
often integrated only shallowly into the country as means and not ends, as
temporary worker commodities.
Sure, one might say, but what about the
Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) coming to power? One of the most
conspicuous features of the August 2009 election—otherwise meant to
herald a new era of change—was the absence of a strong immigration
policy on the part of either the DPJ or the LDP, notwithstanding the
importance of the issue for the country's future. And under the DPJ, the
LDP policy continues, and government officials are far more preoccupied
with cracking down on illegal "overstayers" than introducing
pro-immigration policies and educational initiatives. As for the general
public, it is rapidly aging and becoming a nation of retirees, and it is
doubtful that these silver-haired voters will support proposals for a
major influx of foreigners in their quiet communities.
The world's loss
For many years Japan has fretted about its
shrinking population. Interestingly enough, these worries have not
translated into strong political or popular support for a revised
immigration policy. Instead, the default orientation continues to limit
immigrants, and arguments on the other side are muted. Despite the many
potential benefits of more immigration in Japan—economic and cultural
renewal, remittances, personal fulfillment, global linkages, and
others—the country is likely to do no more than tinker with its
immigration levels.
By implication, therefore, Japan is also
likely to become a smaller, more debt-laden and less productive country in
the coming decades, and regrettably, less of a player in global efforts to
solve pressing challenges like climate change. If Japan goes gently into
the good night of its retirement, that will be the world's loss.
© John Haffner 2010 All rights reserved.
 |
John
Haffner is the lead author, with Dr. Tomas Casas i Klett and Dr. Jean-Pierre
Lehmann, of Japan’s Open Future: An Agenda for Global
Citizenship (Anthem Press, March 2009); he is writing in a
personal capacity while also drawing on some arguments from that
book. |
This page last updated 2010-02-23
Eyes on Japan compiled and edited by
David Appleyard, 2001-2010 |
Privacy
Policy
|
