National aliens, local citizens? Japan's immigrant integration politics in comparative perspective

Affluent societies around the world increasingly share a common dependence on immigrant labor, but they differ greatly in the kinds of political, social, and cultural rights that they accord to immigrants, especially those who are not citizens. Demographic pressures ensure Japan's increasing reliance on foreign labor, but foreign residents in Japan have traditionally faced exclusion and disenfranchisement at the national level, few avenues for the acquisition of legal citizenship status, ethnically defined perceptions of what it means to be 'Japanese,' and a political system with limited room for the voices of indigenous minorities and opposition parties, let alone foreigners. By contrast, even as recent labor migration has saddled numerous Japanese municipalities with the same diversity challenges as the gateway cities of more longstanding immigrant-receiving societies, Japan's local governments have surprisingly encouraged foreigners' political participation and accommodated their cultural differences.;This study compares the history and policies of six Japanese cities, finding significant variation where conventional wisdom would predict similar policy outcomes---that is, in neighboring cities with virtually the same immigrant populations and political, social, and economic histories: Kobe and Osaka as sites of primarily pre-WWII Korean settlement, Toyota and Hamamatsu as sites of recent Japanese-Brazilian settlement, and Yokohama and Kawasaki as cities with mixed immigrant populations. The analysis shows that differences in the present-day policy approaches of each city can be traced back to strategic decisions made in the early stages of pro-immigrant advocacy efforts. Cities where early generations of immigrant activists prioritized representation by tempering rights claims and working with city administrators to become city service providers, for example---ultimately pursued more inclusive, truly multicultural policies.;The implications of this study are two-fold. First, in contrast to previous scholarship portraying Japanese civil society as subsumed by the state and primarily influenced by rather than influencing state policies, this study shows that immigrant civic associations can effectively make their voices heard by working within bureaucratic channels, and that proximity to the state can actually give them influence disproportionate to their status in Japanese society. Second, by showing that variation in immigrant integration policies flowed more from the citizenship goals of immigrants themselves than from those of policymakers, this study challenges assumptions about the rigid opportunities and constraints that political, economic, and social conditions in the host society place on immigrants' political efficacy. Even in the most challenging of political environments, foreign residents and their supporters in Japan have found ways to affect policies. Their successful assertion of membership claims complicates Japan's traditional tying of citizenship rights to nationality status and raises questions about just what citizenship means in a country without formal institutions for integrating immigrants.