PUTZ Network
プツネットワーク
計画関連
Plan for the Realization of a
Multicultural Society in Japan
January 11, 2025 (Reiwa 7)
Introduction
Multicultural coexistence is an extremely complex and often misunderstood topic. A brief explanation is not enough to convey its essence, and instead of an emotional perspective, a rational approach is required. The reasons for this will be explained below. If you would like to gain a deeper understanding or discuss specific policies, please feel free to contact us.
You can check the contact information "here" or search for "Kenji Kawanishi Contact".
So, what exactly is "multicultural coexistence"? Broadly speaking, there are two main answers.
In conclusion, multicultural coexistence in Japan should be understood as "a set of policies and measures aimed at maintaining the positive effects of internationalization—an unavoidable consequence of globalization—while transforming its negative effects into positive ones, with the goal of benefiting the Japanese population, which makes up approximately 98% of the total population in Japan." However, to fully understand this concept, one must delve deeply into the contents of this long and complex document.
Before that, let’s first explain the general definition of the term. Through the following explanation, it will become clear that this definition is merely a "provisional definition."
General Definition of Multicultural Coexistence
In general, multicultural coexistence is defined as "a society where people of different nationalities and ethnicities acknowledge and respect each other's cultural differences, build equal relationships, and live together as members of the community."
This definition is based on a report published by Japan’s Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications in 2006, titled "Study on the Promotion of Multicultural Coexistence – Towards the Promotion of Multicultural Coexistence in Local Communities." Originally, this definition was intended solely as a conceptual basis to facilitate discussions on multicultural coexistence at the local level, but it has since become widely accepted and remains in use today.
However, this definition contains elements that can be considered "vague, outdated, and inappropriate."
-
Vague: The definition is overly abstract, making it difficult to form a concrete image of the concept.
-
Outdated: It was established nearly 20 years ago and reflects the conditions of that time, making it unsuitable for today’s Japan.
-
Inappropriate: The focus is on local communities, failing to consider multicultural coexistence on a national scale.
Why Is This Definition Still Widely Used?
This can be explained by a psychological phenomenon similar to the saying "If everyone crosses at a red light, it's not scary." This phrase became popular through Japanese comedy in the 1980s and illustrates how people tend to follow the group without question.
Since this definition was established by the "Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications", a highly authoritative institution, many people have accepted it without questioning its validity.
The term "multicultural coexistence" started being used in Japan around the mid-1990s, but serious discussions only began after the ministry’s 2006 report. Since then, numerous policies and subsidies have been introduced. However, in practice, existing international exchange organizations and human rights groups have continued their traditional activities, resulting in a situation where the focus has shifted from achieving multicultural coexistence to "perpetual multicultural coexistence promotion activities."
Hints for Achieving a Multicultural Society in Japan
The realization of multicultural coexistence in Japan is similar to the development of a new car in the country.
The phrase "in Japan" is crucial here. The types of vehicles required in the United States, Europe, and Japan are different—not only in terms of design but also in regulations, road conditions, tunnel sizes, and many other factors. This means that "specifying the location is extremely important."
Next, the phrase "new car" is key to understanding whether development (which, in the case of multicultural coexistence, corresponds to realization) is possible.
In the development of a car, research is first conducted, followed by planning, design, engineering, prototyping, and testing before reaching mass production.
If no initial research is conducted, production can still proceed based on assumptions, but without a clear design, it is impossible to define the car’s specifications. Without resolving this issue, the project remains stuck in an ambiguous state, leading to a situation where people claim that "a car is being made," but no one knows exactly what kind of car it is.
This situation is very similar to what is currently happening with Japan’s multicultural coexistence policies.
To solve this problem, we must first specifically define the meaning of "multicultural coexistence" and clearly identify the locations and objectives to be achieved. Only then can sustainable policies be developed that consider the interests of Japanese society as a whole.
Multicultural coexistence in Japan should not simply mean the coexistence of different cultures, but rather a rational approach that considers the overall benefit of society. Additionally, it is essential to recognize that 98% of Japan’s population consists of Japanese citizens, who have voting rights, whereas foreign residents do not. This means that the conditions have never been and will never be numerically or legally "equal" from the beginning.
Without a logical approach based on concrete actions, the realization of a multicultural society in Japan "will never be achieved."
Increase in Foreign Residents and Decrease in the Japanese Population in Japan
In recent years, the number of foreign residents in Japan has been rapidly increasing. According to the 2020 National Census (Reiwa 2), the Japanese population was 123,399,000 people (97.8% of the total population), while the foreign population was 2,747,000 people (2.2%). As the number of foreign residents continues to rise, the Japanese population continues to decline.
Examining the contents of Japan Statistics 2021, the Japanese population was approximately 126.167 million in 2019 (Reiwa 1), 126.443 million in 2018 (Heisei 30), and 126.706 million in 2017 (Heisei 29), showing a declining trend of about 260,000 people per year. Conversely, the foreign population was 2,933,137 in 2019, 2,731,093 in 2018, and 2,561,848 in 2017, indicating an annual increase of approximately 180,000 people.
According to the 2020 National Census (Reiwa 2), among all prefectures, Tokyo has the largest number of foreign residents (564,000 people), followed by Aichi (259,000 people), Osaka (242,000 people), Kanagawa (231,000 people), and Saitama (186,000 people). The foreign population residing in these five prefectures accounts for about 53.9% of the total foreign population in Japan.
However, when considering the percentage of foreigners relative to the total population of each municipality, the situation changes drastically. The reason for this can be seen in the population data of various cities and districts. For example, according to the Basic Resident Register of Ikuno Ward in Osaka City (as of the end of March 2021), the total population was 126,930 people, of which 27,460 (approximately 21.6%) were foreigners, including 20,397 South Koreans and North Koreans.
Another example is Kawakami Village in Minamisaku District, which published a population vision report in October 2015. According to this report, between 2005 and 2010, the population of the village increased due to the acceptance of foreign trainees that began in 2003. As of 2015, the Japanese population was approximately 4,000 people, but due to the annual acceptance of 700 to 800 foreign trainees, the proportion of foreigners reached approximately 19%.
Additionally, according to the 2021 Foreign Population Table, published on the Oizumi Town website on March 31, 2021, the town had a total population of 41,770 people, of which 7,918 (approximately 18.96%) were foreigners, including 4,595 Brazilians. These examples show that the foreign population in each municipality varies according to local circumstances, leading to significant differences in absolute numbers and percentages of foreigners in different areas.
Another factor directly related to the increase in the foreign population in Japan is the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act, which, despite having legal force equivalent to a law, is technically not a "law" in the strictest sense.
The Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act was promulgated on October 4, 1951, and enforced on November 1 of the same year as one of the Potsdam Orders. Initially, it was called the Immigration Control Ordinance, but due to Japan's accession to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the Refugee Protocol, its title was changed to the current one on January 1, 1982.
This ordinance has a unique characteristic as a “Potsdam Order with the force of law”, which led to the abbreviation being changed from "Immigration Ordinance" to a more practical term, "Immigration and Refugee Act". Furthermore, the responsibility for certifying individuals claiming to be refugees, based on the Convention and Protocol on Refugees, was assigned to the Immigration Bureau of the Ministry of Justice.
Timeline of the Situation Surrounding the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act
In 1990 (Heisei 2), a revision was made that established the "permanent resident" status. As a result of this revision, the right to work was granted up to the third generation of Japanese descendants (with some exceptions), making it easier for nipo-Brazilians and nipo-Peruvians to enter Japan. As a result, the number of foreigners in Japan increased rapidly, rising from approximately 1 million in 1990 (Heisei 2) to about 2 million in 2005 (Heisei 17).
In June 2005 (Heisei 17), the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications pointed out that, given the continuous increase in the foreign population, the existing national systems were not adequately addressing the issues related to the reception of foreigners. It also became clear that local governments, which are primarily responsible for providing services directly to the residents, were facing various problems, with a notable concentration of foreigners in regions where industries such as manufacturing are predominant. It was also anticipated that in the future, with the onset of Japan’s population decline and the increased international mobility due to economic globalization, issues involving foreign residents would become a common concern for all local governments in Japan. Against this backdrop, a research group for promoting multicultural coexistence was established, and in March 2006 (Heisei 18), the "Report of the Research Group on Promoting Multicultural Coexistence – Towards the Promotion of Multicultural Coexistence in Local Communities" was published. The report discusses the need to promote multicultural coexistence in local communities as follows:
"With the progress of the settlement of foreigners, it is necessary for Japanese society to recognize foreigners not only as tourists or temporary visitors but as residents and members of the local community. This means that, alongside providing comprehensive support for foreign residents, it is important to build a system that encourages their participation in the local community. In other words, the need is growing to advance 'the creation of multicultural communities' that go beyond national and ethnic differences as a new model for local society. As previously mentioned, it is expected that Japan’s total population will rapidly decrease in the future. With the progress of globalization, international mobility will become increasingly active. To maintain the vitality of society, it is essential to create a society where all people, including foreigners, can maximize their abilities. Therefore, the promotion of multicultural coexistence in local communities will become even more necessary. In this context, our research group defined multicultural coexistence in the local community as 'people of different nationalities and ethnicities recognizing each other's cultural differences, striving to establish an equal relationship, and living together as members of the local community' and discussed how to promote it. As can be understood from this definition, it is important to have the awareness that both Japanese residents and foreign residents are the ones supporting the local community in order to promote multicultural coexistence."
Following the publication of this report, government agencies and local governments adopted the definition of multicultural coexistence and used it as the foundation for their policies and measures.
However, we must not forget that the term "multicultural coexistence" has its own meaning. Multicultural coexistence refers simply to different cultures living together, and it is only by specifying the location that its content can be defined more concretely. Based on this principle, the "Report of the Research Group on Promoting Multicultural Coexistence" designates a vague "location" (community). The intentional use of a vague location can be interpreted as an indication for each municipality to aim for multicultural coexistence according to its own circumstances. This leads local governments to specifically define what "community" means. However, when defining multicultural coexistence, the research group should have considered the entire country of Japan as a single community.
Nevertheless, by specifying the "location" in a vague manner, the reality was ignored, which led to a misguided understanding of multicultural coexistence. As a result, the definition of multicultural coexistence became more aligned with a multiculturalism model that strongly emphasizes equality.
On March 27, 2006, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications published the "Plan for Promoting Multicultural Coexistence in Communities." The content of this plan is as follows:
1. The Significance of Multicultural Coexistence in Communities
The significance of multicultural coexistence in communities can be illustrated as follows. However, in the guidelines and plans (hereafter referred to as "guidelines, etc."), the history and current status of multicultural coexistence policies in each region should be organized, and the significance of multicultural coexistence in communities should be clarified, including the challenges and future directions.
(1) Communities as Entities Responsible for the Reception of Foreign Residents
Local governments play the main role as the entities responsible for providing administrative services to receive foreign nationals into the community, and they have a significant role in implementing multicultural coexistence policies.
(2) Guaranteeing the Human Rights of Foreign Residents
The promotion of multicultural coexistence policies by local governments is in line with the spirit of respecting the human rights of foreign nationals, as outlined in the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights," the "International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination," and other relevant agreements.
(3) Revitalization of the Local Community
By promoting the creation of an open community, the revitalization of the community is achieved, which leads to the promotion of local industries and the economy.
(4) Improving Cultural Understanding among Residents
By advancing the creation of multicultural communities, it becomes possible to improve the cultural understanding of local residents and foster the development of younger generations with excellent intercultural communication skills.
(5) Universal Design for Community Building
Promoting the development of a community where people of different nationalities and ethnicities acknowledge and respect each other's cultural differences and strive to build equal relationships while living together as members of the community is an approach to community building from the perspective of universal design.
2. Basic Concepts of Multicultural Coexistence Policies in Communities
The basic concepts of multicultural coexistence policies in communities include the following points. In the guidelines, the fundamental concepts of policies for multicultural coexistence that meet the needs of the community should be clearly presented, taking into account the community’s characteristics, the understanding of the residents, and the conditions and needs of foreign residents. Particular attention should be given to foreign residents who do not have sufficient Japanese language skills.
(1) Communication Support
Support should be provided for communication with foreign residents, especially newcomers, many of whom do not understand Japanese, leading to various challenges arising from the difficulty of communication.
(2) Life Support
There is a problem that the basic environment needed for foreign residents to live in the community is not sufficiently provided, so support measures should be implemented across all aspects of daily life.
(3) Building a Multicultural Community
Foreign residents often lack opportunities for interaction in the community, leading to isolation, and tensions between Japanese and foreign residents are not uncommon. Therefore, it is necessary to promote awareness throughout the community and create a region that encourages the autonomy of foreign residents.
(4) Establishing a System for Promoting Multicultural Coexistence Policies
A system should be established to implement the policies described in (1) to (3), clarifying the roles and responsibilities of prefectures, cities, international associations, NGOs, and other private organizations, and promoting collaboration and cooperation among them.
Point of Attention:
The most important point to observe here is item (3), "Building a Multicultural Community." In the examples of multicultural coexistence that will be published by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, differences in understanding of the meaning of multicultural coexistence will become apparent. Furthermore, as can be seen from the previous content, the focus on support for foreigners, the guarantee of their human rights, and equality is specifically detailed more than other aspects, becoming the central focus of the significance of multicultural coexistence in communities. In other words, because the specific scope of what should be done was not clearly defined, the significance of "multicultural coexistence" tends to become unrealistic.
In 2008 (Heisei 20), the global financial crisis known as the Lehman Shock occurred. Between 2009 (Heisei 21) and 2012 (Heisei 24), the number of foreigners in Japan decreased, partly due to the impact of the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011 (Heisei 23). During this period, permanent residents mainly came from Brazil and Peru, while special permanent residents were primarily from South Korea and North Korea. However, from 2013 (Heisei 25) onward, the number of foreigners started to rise again and has continued to increase year by year.
In the regular session of the Diet in 2009 (Heisei 21), the "Law to Partially Amend the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act and the Special Law on Immigration Control for Those Who Have Renounced Japanese Nationality Based on the Peace Treaty with Japan" (hereinafter referred to as the "Amendment Law") was passed and enacted, and was promulgated on July 15, 2009. The Amendment Law introduced a new residency management system, including the issuance of residence cards, the issuance of special permanent resident certificates, the review of the training and technical internship system, the unification of the residency qualifications "Study" and "Education," and the establishment of the Immigration Detention Facility Inspection Committee. Additionally, with this, the foreigner registration system was abolished.
On July 9, 2012 (Heisei 24), the new residency management system began. With the introduction of this system, the "Residence Card" was issued, and the maximum residence period was extended to 5 years. Furthermore, the foreigner registration system was abolished, and changes were made to the re-entry permit system.
In February 2016 (Heisei 28), the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications marked the 10th anniversary of the formulation and notification of the "Plan for Promoting Multicultural Coexistence in Local Communities." In response, the ministry presented guidelines and approaches to assist in the formulation of multicultural coexistence policies and plans in local governments. To further promote multicultural coexistence initiatives in communities, a "Working Group for Creating a Multicultural Coexistence Best Practices Collection" was held, and in March 2017 (Heisei 29), the "Multicultural Coexistence Best Practices Collection – 10 Years of the Multicultural Coexistence Promotion Plan: Building the Future of Our Communities Together" was published. Through this collection, it is possible to see how local governments and the organizations involved recognize multicultural coexistence.
Best Practices Collection:
-
Communication Support (9 examples)
(1) Information provision in multiple languages and "Simple Japanese" (6 examples),
(2) Support for adult Japanese language learning (3 examples). -
Life Support (28 examples)
(1) Housing (2 examples),
(2) Education (10 examples),
(3) Work environment (4 examples),
(4) Health care and welfare (6 examples),
(5) Disaster prevention (6 examples). -
Building Multicultural Communities (9 examples)
(1) Awareness-raising for multicultural coexistence in the community (4 examples),
(2) Self-reliance and social participation of foreign residents (3 examples),
(3) Establishing systems related to multicultural coexistence (2 examples). -
Contributions to Community Revitalization and Globalization (6 examples)
(1) Contributions to community revitalization (3 examples),
(2) Contributions to globalization (3 examples).
(Total of 52 examples)
As mentioned earlier, in addition to the vague designation of "community" as a place, there is a tendency to focus on aspects such as support for foreigners, the guarantee of human rights, and equality, while other key elements related to multicultural coexistence are not concretely addressed. As a result, the term "realization" has been replaced with "promotion," and ultimately, the catalog has become "a collection of examples that are simply good to do," without much impact.
The distribution of examples is mainly concentrated on support and international exchange. Unfortunately, the Hiroshima Prefecture International Affairs Division conducted multiculturalism training for municipal staff, but upon reviewing the content, it was found to be focused on support for dealing with foreigners, which ultimately remains limited to assistance. The reason why local government employees should receive training on multiculturalism is that, to encourage municipal residents to understand multiculturalism, they must first understand it themselves. Therefore, this training is mandatory and of great importance. However, for multicultural coexistence to be realized, all departments involved with multicultural issues — in other words, all departments and all staff members — must receive training and understand the topic, or else it will be meaningless.
Let’s consider departments or sections in municipalities that have no direct contact with foreigners. Those who are somewhat familiar with issues involving foreigners may mention departments like the election section (since foreigners do not have voting rights), but just because foreigners don't have voting rights doesn’t mean they don’t have reasons to go to that department. Even without rights, foreigners may want to know about those rights or understand why they do not have certain rights. Therefore, multicultural coexistence cannot be realized by one department alone; it can only be achieved when all departments and the systems they offer are adapted to address multicultural needs. In other words, multicultural coexistence in Japan will be realized through the implementation of multicultural coexistence in each region. And the realization of multicultural coexistence in each region will be achieved through the efforts of each local government.
For multicultural coexistence to be realized in Japan, a reform of awareness and perceptions among Japanese people, who make up about 98% of the population, is necessary. However, even more important is the reform of the awareness and perceptions of local government employees who are responsible for planning and implementing multicultural promotion policies. This is similar to why a salesperson who lacks confidence in the products they are selling has poor sales performance. How can local government employees contribute to the realization of multicultural coexistence if they do not fully understand the topic, do not recognize the need for its realization, and do not genuinely wish to promote it?
Although titles like "Building Multicultural Communities," "Community Revitalization," and "Contribution to Globalization," mentioned in other best practice collections, are not problematic, the actual project contents and the methods of implementation are questionable. Even if the titles change, the examples presented are solely focused on support, international exchange, and tourism. While these are not completely irrelevant to multicultural coexistence, the problem is that the projects lack specificity, resulting in insufficient scale and impact. In these three areas, it is assumed that simply continuing to implement them indefinitely is enough, without requiring concrete results, which leads to easier-to-execute multicultural promotion projects.
It is important to note that there is nothing wrong with promoting equality or supporting foreigners. In fact, this can help foreigners in many cases. However, what is important is to understand that these actions are not directly related to the realization of a multicultural society. In simple terms, multiculturalism is not synonymous with support, international exchange, or tourism.
On November 18, 2016 (Heisei 28), during the 192nd Extraordinary Session of the National Diet, the law to partially amend the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act (Law No. 88 of 2016) was enacted, and it was promulgated on November 28 of the same year. The main content of this amendment is the establishment of a new residence status for foreigners with qualifications as caregivers, allowing them to work in caregiving roles, as well as the introduction of penalties and the strengthening of the system for the revocation of residence status to address the issue of so-called "illegal stayers."
On December 8, 2018 (Heisei 30), during the 197th Session of the National Diet (Extraordinary Session), the law to partially amend the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act and the Ministry of Justice Establishment Act (Law No. 102 of 2018) was enacted, and it was promulgated on December 14 of the same year. The main content of this amendment is the creation of the residence statuses "Specific Skills 1" and "Specific Skills 2," as well as the establishment of the Immigration Services Agency.
In September 2020 (Reiwa 2), the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications revised the "Plan for Promoting Multicultural Coexistence in Local Communities." The content of the revision is as follows:
``Challenges in the Regions Considering Socioeconomic Changes
When promoting multicultural coexistence in the regions, the following challenges arise:
1. Communication Support
-
With the diversification of nationalities among foreign residents, it is necessary to provide multilingual support, including rare languages and "easy Japanese," according to the number and nationality of foreign residents in the region.
-
With the advancement of multilingual translation technology and its social implementation, it is essential to actively utilize ICT tools, such as smartphone apps, to promote multilingual support.
-
Given the continuous increase in foreign residents, it is necessary to promote Japanese language education to create an environment where they can live and interact smoothly with local residents in daily and social life.
2. Daily Life Support
-
With the increase in foreign residents, the number of children and students requiring Japanese language instruction is rising, making it essential to promote education and improve the conditions for the enrollment of foreign children in schools.
-
Given the intensification of natural disasters, such as extreme weather events, and the COVID-19 pandemic, it is necessary to promote responses for foreigners in these situations.
-
With the increase of foreign residents, providing multilingual support in medical and health services, childcare, and welfare services is necessary.
-
With the creation of new visa categories, it is important to improve the environment for receiving foreign workers and implement measures to prevent concentration in metropolitan areas and other specific regions.
3. Awareness Raising and Support for Social Participation
-
Considering the enactment of the "Law on Promoting Efforts to Eliminate Unfair Discriminatory Behavior Against Foreign Nationals" (Law No. 58 of 2016), it is necessary to strengthen consultation systems, improve education, and promote awareness-raising activities to eliminate discriminatory behavior.
-
Looking ahead to the "new normal" in the post-COVID era, where no one is left behind, it is essential to create an environment in local communities that promotes the exchange of people, connections, and mutual help, in order to foster a more diverse and inclusive society.
-
Considering the increase in the number of foreign residents with long-term stay visas and the young age structure of foreign residents, it is essential to promote initiatives where foreign residents become active agents in local society.
4. Promoting Regional Revitalization and Adapting to Globalization
-
With the rapid progress of population decline and aging, it is necessary to promote regional revitalization and sustainable community-building by collaborating and working with foreign residents.
-
In response to rapidly advancing globalization and to bring its benefits to the region, it is essential to make use of the knowledge and expertise of foreign residents.
Significance of Promoting Multicultural Coexistence in the Regions
Promoting multicultural coexistence in the regions holds great significance, including:
-
"The reception of foreign residents by local communities," "guaranteeing the human rights of foreign residents," "regional revitalization," and "increasing the intercultural understanding of residents," and its importance is growing, especially through the following points:
1. Building a "New Normal" Through the Realization of a Diverse and Inclusive Society
It is necessary to create an environment where all foreign residents can live comfortably, just like Japanese citizens, by ensuring they receive the same administrative services. By promoting diversity and inclusivity, we can build a "new normal" where no one is left behind, including foreign residents, and foster a society that respects cultural differences. This also aligns with the "Sustainable Development Goals" (SDGs), which include the keyword "leaving no one behind" as a fundamental principle in all areas.
2. Contribution of Foreign Residents to Regional Revitalization and Globalization
Foreign residents are becoming active participants by utilizing their strengths and unique perspectives. They contribute to regional revitalization by sharing information, starting businesses with local products, and promoting inbound tourism. Collaboration with these foreign residents can contribute to regional revitalization and globalization.
3. Active Participation of Foreign Residents in the Local Community and Securing Diverse Stakeholders
The number of foreign residents with indefinite stay permits ("permanent residents") is increasing annually, accounting for about 30% of the total foreign residents. This trend, along with the young age structure of foreign residents, indicates that they are becoming pillars in supporting local communities, especially those affected by population decline and aging. Their involvement in promoting multicultural coexistence policies is expected to enhance the quality of these policies.
4. Establishing an Environment for Receiving Foreign Talent in a Way That Does Not Concentrate in Urban Areas
As the number of foreign workers increases, it is anticipated that the smooth and proper reception of specific skilled foreign workers will also progress. In this context, it is essential to create a system in which foreign residents can receive sufficient administrative services in local regions. This includes improving employment support, working conditions, and living environments, in collaboration with national and local authorities, businesses, and other relevant organizations. Promoting multicultural coexistence policies in the region will help establish an environment for receiving foreign talent in a manner that does not lead to concentration in urban areas.´´
In the multicultural coexistence promotion projects so far, among local governments, organizations, and other stakeholders, most have not fully understood what "multicultural coexistence" truly means. It has often been treated merely as a policy related to foreigners, grouped together with international cooperation and international exchange. Originally, multicultural coexistence was supposed to serve as a policy for internationalization management by designating specific locations, but due to excessive consideration of the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" and the "International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination," multicultural coexistence came to be seen as synonymous with "multiculturalism," ultimately resulting in policies focused solely on supporting foreigners.
However, the independence of foreigners is not achieved through support, but rather through the support of the local community, which is primarily composed of Japanese people. Currently, however, the local community misunderstands the reason for supporting foreigners. There is a mindset of "because they have human rights" or "because foreigners are pitiable and need support," and as a result, a situation has been created where "only those who want to help provide assistance."
Originally, it is important for Japanese people to understand that supporting foreign residents is something that "also benefits our own community." By deepening this understanding, multicultural coexistence can be recognized not as something dependent on the goodwill of a specific group of people, but as a benefit for society as a whole, enabling more people to actively participate.
Language Support as an Obstacle to Achieving Multicultural Coexistence
In Japan, the majority of foreigners are not fluent in Japanese. Those who can speak Japanese at a conversational level are a minority, and only a small number of foreigners can be considered fluent in Japanese. When analyzing the commonalities among different groups, it can be predicted that support plays a significant role in improving Japanese language proficiency.
Foreigners who can speak Japanese at a conversational level or are fluent tend to receive little or no language support. In contrast, most foreigners who are not fluent in Japanese tend to receive some degree of language support, whether minimal, moderate, or extensive. While language support may help in the short term, it can also suppress the desire for self-sufficiency that comes from improving language skills.
About 20 years ago, in a situation where the number of foreigners was continually increasing, the existing national systems were not fully equipped to address the challenges related to the acceptance of foreigners. Local governments, which are directly responsible for providing resident services, face various issues. Currently, there is a noticeable concentration of foreigners in regions with strong manufacturing industries, but given that Japan is entering an era of population decline and that globalization will further increase international migration, it is expected that issues related to foreign residents will become common to local governments across the country in the near future.
Therefore, when the study group established by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications advanced discussions on promoting multicultural coexistence, they defined the concept of multicultural coexistence in local areas based on the knowledge and conditions of the time. However, no major changes have been made since then.
Given that the circumstances of foreigners, as well as Japanese society as a whole, have changed significantly, it is desirable to reconsider what "multicultural coexistence" means and what is necessary to "achieve" it, and to develop a concrete plan for its realization.
What is the Current Multicultural Coexistence?
In modern times, it has become common not only to look up the meanings of words but also to search anything on the internet. In other words, for most Japanese citizens, the internet can be considered the source of all information related to daily life. Although much of this information, such as that about diseases, the meanings of words, people, or places, may not be entirely reliable, the reality is that for many people, what they obtain from the internet becomes their truth. In this context, when searching for "What is multicultural coexistence?" on the internet, two main results appear.
Source: Free Encyclopedia "Wikipedia"
Multiculturalism (in English: multiculturalism) is the idea or policy that different cultural groups in society should be treated as equals.
Multicultural Coexistence: Various municipalities, organizations, and ministries (the most common content)
Multicultural coexistence is defined as "people from different nationalities and ethnicities who, recognizing each other's cultural differences, seek to build equal relationships while living together as members of the local community."
The most commonly cited content is found in the "Report on the Promotion of Multicultural Coexistence" issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs in March 2006, specifically in Chapter 5, which addresses the need for promoting multicultural coexistence in local areas. This definition of multicultural coexistence was established about 20 years ago through discussions among a limited group and is not necessarily the definitive definition of multicultural coexistence itself.
Multicultural coexistence is not simply about many different cultures living together, and achieving that by itself is not particularly difficult. However, by specifying a location, it can become a document with multiple meanings. Initially, it is a mistake to use the concept of multicultural coexistence only for foreigners and Japanese people; we must also consider that the regional cultures within Japan, which vary by area, are also part of multiculturalism.
As I mentioned earlier, it is necessary to specify the location for multicultural coexistence, as there are specific forms of multicultural coexistence depending on where it is applied. For example, when considering a global multicultural coexistence plan for an island or unclaimed land, where people from different nationalities are sent (with the absolute condition that there are no biases based on number of people, age, gender, or other factors), it would be impossible to set conditions that favor a specific nationality. In such cases, a multicultural coexistence plan based on multiculturalism would be required.
Furthermore, if biases based on number of people, age, gender, or other factors begin to emerge, multicultural coexistence would no longer be applicable, and a suitable international management policy would be necessary. Specifically, policies would be required to prevent such biases from arising.
However, in Japan, multicultural coexistence applies within the country, not in unclaimed land. Distinctions based on number of people, age, gender, or other factors are immensely present. The indigenous people of Japan are Japanese, who make up about 98% of the population, while foreigners make up about 2%. When divided by nationality, there are some nationalities that are difficult to quantify, but it can be said that from the beginning, Japanese and foreigners have not been in an equal position in Japan. This is not a sad reality but a simple fact and something that is to be expected.
If we change the location from Japan to the United States, Brazil, or any other country, the same phenomenon would occur. This is society itself, and trying to make Japanese and foreigners, who have never been in an equal position, build a relationship of equality goes against the essence of society. Accepting the fact that there is a difference in position, while establishing a relationship of mutual respect, is what can be considered the realistic promotion of multicultural coexistence.
Furthermore, the policy for achieving multicultural coexistence in Japan does not need to include human rights. This is because multicultural coexistence should be a plan that proceeds on the premise that human rights are protected. When human rights are not respected, it is a human rights issue, not a multicultural coexistence issue.
Considering this, what can be said is that, at this point, the definition of multicultural coexistence established in Japan, by specifying the location as a "community," is not multicultural coexistence within Japan but in an unspecified community, and it is essentially just a slight modification of the definition of multiculturalism, making it an unrealistic and impossible policy to implement.
What is the Ideal Model for Multicultural Coexistence?
If we consider multicultural coexistence to be the same as multiculturalism, then it should be promoted as multiculturalism, not multicultural coexistence. However, since this would not be multicultural coexistence, the title should be "Multiculturalism Policy" rather than "Promotion of Multicultural Coexistence."
The ideal model for multicultural coexistence (hereinafter referred to as the original multicultural coexistence) must be "multicultural coexistence in Japan" if we consider it with the assumption of being implemented in Japan. In other words, the policy should prioritize Japan and its citizens but must also be beneficial to foreigners (since human rights must be protected). Simply put, foreigners should not be oppressed, but they should not be overly favored either.
The reason for this is that, for multicultural coexistence to be realized, it is not enough for all Japanese citizens to merely participate in it; they must be actively involved. The minimum requirement is that the form of coexistence should be favorable to the 98% of the Japanese population.
However, it is important to highlight a key point. There are no right or wrong answers when it comes to multicultural coexistence policies. The current multicultural coexistence initiatives being promoted in Japan, while unrealistic and unachievable in their form, are still multicultural coexistence initiatives. Regardless of the form, as long as we are merely at the stage of desiring promotion, we must acknowledge that it is indeed a "multicultural coexistence promotion initiative."
The term "ideal model for multicultural coexistence" or "original multicultural coexistence" used here implies an assumption aimed at realization. That is to say, the plan for achieving a multicultural society in Japan discussed below is not the only possible plan but a realizable and sustainable one.
Now, to understand what multicultural coexistence in Japan is, the key concepts to consider are "globalization" and "internationalization." However, when considering what multicultural coexistence is, we need to look at these terms not in their established meanings but from a perspective that aligns with multicultural coexistence.
When we search for the meanings of globalization and internationalization on the internet, we find the following information:
Source: Wikipedia
Globalization (English: globalization, globalisation) refers to the phenomenon where social or economic relations expand beyond the traditional boundaries of nations or regions, causing various changes on a global scale. The terms globalization, mondialization, or geoglobalization are also used. The word is applied in various social, cultural, and economic activities. The concept of "globalization" is broader than "internationalization" because it involves changes on a global scale, without the limitations of national borders. When we consider issues between countries, we are dealing with "international" problems, while when we think about issues affecting the entire planet, we are dealing with "global" problems.
Source: Wikipedia
Internationalization (English: internationalization) refers to the phenomenon in which several nations strengthen their ties and collaborate with each other, creating mutual economic and cultural influences. An internationalized society is one where this process is progressing. The main difference between internationalization and globalization is that internationalization focuses on relations between nation-states, while globalization views the world as a single system, not necessarily dependent on sovereign states.
However, as mentioned earlier, when considering what multicultural coexistence is, it is necessary to approach these concepts from a new perspective that aligns with multicultural coexistence.
The Meaning of Globalization and Internationalization in Achieving Multicultural Coexistence
Globalization is a phenomenon that, with the evolution of civilization, becomes an unstoppable force. It refers to the situation in which people, information, technologies, products, cultures, languages, and others circulate between countries, with conditions set for this exchange to happen.
Internationalization is "the result of the acceleration of globalization." These results can be divided into two categories: whether they have a positive or negative impact on the country and its people. Since globalization is an inevitable phenomenon, internationalization also becomes an inevitable phenomenon, unless a country chooses to isolate itself. However, even if a country isolates itself, there is no guarantee that its internationalization will be stopped.
Therefore, true multicultural coexistence (multicultural coexistence in Japan) should be understood as: "a plan to maintain the benefits of internationalization caused by globalization, transforming negative impacts into positive ones. In other words, it refers to multicultural coexistence policies in Japan that aim for the benefits of the Japanese population, which makes up about 98% of the country's total population."
Additionally, for multicultural coexistence to be realized in Japan, policies that prioritize the Japanese people are necessary. It is also essential for the Japanese people to actively participate, and to make this possible, local government employees working on various projects with the goal of promoting multicultural coexistence in Japan must recognize, understand, and sincerely engage in the implementation of these projects.
Finally, all local government employees involved in the realization of multicultural coexistence in Japan can be considered as part of this effort, as there are no departments or divisions unrelated to multicultural coexistence.
Furthermore, even when specifying a more restricted area, such as a city, municipality, or province, specifying it in detail, such as "X province," "Y city," or "Z district," will not change the original meaning of multicultural coexistence. The only difference will be a slight alteration in the content of the projects necessary for its implementation.
Therefore, the most important points for the planning of achieving multicultural coexistence in Japan are as follows:
-
A proper promotion system and clear distribution of responsibilities are necessary.
-
Securing language specialists must be a priority.
-
Multicultural coexistence projects should be privatized.
-
The beneficiaries of these projects are not foreigners, but the Japanese people.
-
We should not wait for the need to arise from the awareness, recognition, or perception of the Japanese people; instead, this need must be created.
-
The JET Program (ALT, CIR, SEA) is not a project aimed at achieving multicultural coexistence.
-
International cooperation projects are not aimed at achieving multicultural coexistence.
-
International exchange projects are not aimed at achieving multicultural coexistence.
-
Support for foreign residents' livelihoods is not a project aimed at achieving multicultural coexistence.
-
Support for Japanese language learning is not a project aimed at achieving multicultural coexistence.
-
Medical interpreter support and communication assistance are not projects aimed at achieving multicultural coexistence.
-
The current disaster prevention system for foreigners is not a project aimed at achieving multicultural coexistence.
Proper Promotion System and Role Allocation
When considering the promotion system and role allocation, it is essential to understand that perspectives can vary significantly depending on the point of view. To advance this discussion, it is important to identify specific aspects of each perspective.
Below is the content described in the Nagano Prefecture Multicultural Coexistence Promotion Guidelines, which were formulated by Nagano Prefecture as a guide for promoting multicultural coexistence in the region.
The national government, prefectural government, municipalities, international exchange associations, businesses, and educational institutions should fulfill their respective roles and work together to promote multicultural coexistence.
(1) National Government
The national government should establish clear policies regarding the acceptance of foreign residents and coexistence with those already living in local communities. Additionally, it should provide necessary financial support to local governments that aim to promote multicultural coexistence.
(2) Prefectural Government
The prefectural government should widely disseminate these guidelines within the region and encourage the implementation of multicultural coexistence policies. Moreover, it should collaborate with municipalities, NGOs, and other organizations promoting multicultural coexistence to address regional challenges in a coordinated manner.
(3) Municipalities
Municipalities should work together with NGOs promoting multicultural coexistence to create inclusive communities for foreign residents. Additionally, they should implement measures to support the daily lives of these residents.
(4) NGOs Promoting Multicultural Coexistence
NGOs should collaborate with other organizations to develop projects that promote multicultural coexistence. Additionally, they should work together with prefectural and municipal governments to implement these initiatives and serve as intermediaries between foreign residents, local administrations, and schools.
(5) Businesses
Businesses should ensure fair employment conditions for foreign workers and provide products and services that take their needs into consideration. Furthermore, they should cooperate with initiatives led by local governments and NGOs to promote multicultural coexistence, thereby contributing to the development of inclusive communities.
(6) Universities
Universities should contribute to the development of multicultural communities through the education and training of professionals in this field, conducting research on multicultural coexistence, supporting policy formulation, and assisting international students in their community activities.
(7) Elementary, Junior High, High Schools, and Special Needs Schools
Schools should promote education that prepares all students to live in a multicultural society. Additionally, they should work with local governments and NGOs to provide academic support to foreign students who lack sufficient Japanese language proficiency.
(8) Citizens
Regardless of nationality, citizens should recognize one another as neighbors and deepen their understanding of different cultures and customs through dialogue and interaction. Furthermore, they should actively embrace diversity and work together to contribute to their local communities.
I would like to analyze these promotion systems and role allocations from another perspective. If they align with the Nagano Prefecture Multicultural Coexistence Promotion Guidelines, I would like to express it as follows: "Without any objections, it can be said that this is absolutely correct."
(1) Regarding the national government, it can be stated without reservation that it is absolutely correct.
(2) Regarding the structure of promotion at the provincial level, in general, there are no problems. However, the phrase "in collaboration with municipalities and NPOs promoting multicultural coexistence" includes the term "etc.," but in practice, private companies are not sufficiently recognized as part of this process. Furthermore, significant problems may arise when trying to improve this situation. In particular, the current reliance on the concerns, discretion, and motivation of those in charge of promoting multicultural coexistence cannot be ignored. When confronted with different perspectives and ideas, it is necessary to adopt an attitude of trying to understand, regardless of whether one accepts them. For example, in the social welfare system, whether benefits are granted depends on the outcome of an assessment. However, if the application is not even accepted, the problem exists before the assessment phase. Similarly, even if the involved parties, institutions, and local governments share the same understanding, if mutual understanding and information sharing are not conducted properly, the discovery of new issues and the implementation of necessary improvements will be obstructed. In municipalities, there is a tendency to fix certain viewpoints. However, at the provincial level, such a situation should not occur because the province plays a crucial role in widely disseminating guidelines within its territory, promoting the development of policies for promotion, and collaborating with municipalities and NPOs to address regional issues.
(3) Regarding the structure of promotion at the municipal level, it can be said that there are contradictions. Just like the province, municipalities do not adequately include private companies in promoting multicultural coexistence. Moreover, municipalities play a role that is diametrically opposed to the concept of multicultural coexistence in Japan. To promote the creation of a multicultural community, the independence of foreigners is essential. However, depending on how support for living is provided, there may be obstacles to this independence, and the need or desire to be independent may be inadequately addressed. Support for living should be sought by the local community (just like for Japanese people), and when the language barrier is inconvenient for an individual, that individual should overcome it themselves and take responsibility. There is no reason for Japan or the Japanese people to be responsible for the lack of language skills among foreigners. Foreigners did not come to Japan as slaves; they chose to come knowing the language, cultural, and institutional barriers (except in certain cases). This is due to personal convenience. There are cases where people with fewer skills in Japanese or knowledge of Japanese culture are the ones who receive the most support, while those with more skills in Japanese generally do not receive support, which makes it clear that support can be an obstacle to independence. Therefore, the original role of municipalities is not to respond to the interest or need of each citizen regarding multicultural coexistence, but to make everyone understand that the need for multicultural coexistence exists regardless of individual concerns. To achieve this, it is necessary for local governments overseeing municipalities to understand the essence of multicultural coexistence and recognize that its implementation is essential. Many municipalities explain that the reason for the small scale of various multicultural coexistence promotion projects is the low interest of citizens and the lack of need. However, this happens because municipalities are not fulfilling their role as local governments. One of the roles of municipalities is to make citizens interested in multicultural coexistence, and if they do not fulfill this role, the promotion of multicultural coexistence cannot begin.
(4) The title "NPOs promoting multicultural coexistence" already creates a contradiction. This is because, in Japan, there are no true NPOs that promote multicultural coexistence. Currently, activities related to international exchange, international cooperation, and support are recognized as projects for promoting multicultural coexistence, but there are no organizations that actually carry out such projects. Moreover, since the goal of such organizations is to "promote" the process of "achieving" multicultural coexistence, the final goal of its implementation is unclear, resulting in an endless cycle of promotion. This makes it unclear what results and achievements are actually required, leading to the proliferation of activities that do not contribute to the realization of multicultural coexistence. For example, there are cases where organizations providing life support consulting are paid for services or subsidies related to the promotion of multicultural coexistence. However, because it is framed under "promotion," as long as there are enough users, the project is considered valid without questioning whether multicultural coexistence is truly being promoted. In this regard, there is a clear difference between "promotion" and "realization." Furthermore, there are problems related to the hiring of multilingual specialists. While organizations carrying out support projects need to ensure qualified professionals, the lack of budget creates a situation where this guarantee is difficult. As a result, multilingual specialists find themselves in an unstable position and exposed to difficult conditions. In particular, most multilingual specialists are hired as freelancers, and although they are paid, they do not have the status of employees and cannot claim workers' rights. Furthermore, the payments they receive are not commensurate with their specialization, often being equivalent to part-time or temporary work wages. Therefore, NPOs and other organizations hiring multilingual specialists, except in the case of Japanese people, become "slave labor" organizations.
(5) Regarding companies, there are no major issues, but if anything were to be pointed out, it would be the fact that it is "voluntary," which is an important issue. While roles are appropriately described, there is often a "no further involvement" attitude afterward. This is very unfortunate and indicates a lack of a long-term vision for realizing multicultural coexistence.
(6) Regarding universities, it can be stated without reservation that they are absolutely correct.
(7) Regarding elementary, secondary, and special support schools, it can be said that there are contradictions similar to the structure of promotion at the municipal level. Originally, multicultural coexistence and support are opposing concepts, but policies that mix the two are being promoted. Additionally, although there are no official records, many schools provide linguistic support and interpreters for parents. However, when viewed from the perspective of promoting multicultural coexistence, these measures ultimately become an obstacle. By treating foreigners in a special way, the support becomes inadequate and, instead of promoting independence, creates partial dependence.
(8) The structure of promotion for provincial citizens can be expressed with the word "unacceptable," due to its lack of content. This is a complete neglect, lacking specificity and effectiveness. Simply put, the stance is "do your best to establish useful relationships and understand each other, without worrying about what is actually necessary for the local society." Furthermore, the use of the expression "regardless of nationality" is problematic, as it can obscure the crucial role of the Japanese in realizing multicultural coexistence and justify excessive support for foreigners. In reality, the role of the Japanese is the most important for achieving multicultural coexistence in Japan. As mentioned earlier, foreigners come to Japan for personal reasons, and unless they face difficulties, they have little interest in Japanese culture. Additionally, the need to improve Japanese language skills is difficult to understand for foreigners who are not facing difficulties. In fact, it is not the foreigners but the Japanese who have difficulty with the language or culture. Therefore, it is important for the Japanese to understand how foreigners think, learn to interact with them appropriately, avoid unnecessary support, and encourage the need for foreigners' independence.
Next, we will reconsider the promotion system and role distribution, taking into account the review from a different perspective mentioned above.
The National Government, the Prefecture, Municipalities, International Exchange Associations, and other organizations, as well as private companies and educational institutions aiming for the realization of multicultural coexistence, will work together, considering their respective roles, to achieve multicultural coexistence.
(1) National Government
The National Government will present clear guidelines on the acceptance of foreigners and coexistence with foreigners living in the region, and will take necessary fiscal measures to support local governments promoting multicultural coexistence.
(2) Prefecture
The Prefecture will widely disseminate these guidelines within the prefecture and promote the implementation of related policies. Moreover, for regional issues, the Prefecture will collaborate with municipalities and private companies aiming for multicultural coexistence, to expand projects. The Prefecture will also listen to different perspectives and integrate various viewpoints in its activities, in addition to following the guidelines.
(3) Municipalities
Municipalities will expand projects extensively, without being limited by local government boundaries, to secure multilingual specialists. Additionally, municipalities will contract private companies specialized in multicultural coexistence to encourage municipal citizens to participate in multicultural coexistence policies and measures in Japan.
(4) Private Companies Aimed at Achieving Multicultural Coexistence in Japan
Private companies aiming for multicultural coexistence will cooperate with the multicultural promotion projects conducted by local governments and will work together with them on projects related to multicultural coexistence policies and measures in Japan. As business operators, they will promote the development of multicultural communities.
(5) Employers
Employers will work on the proper employment of foreign nationals and provide products and services that consider the needs of foreign nationals. They will cooperate with local governments and private companies aiming for multicultural coexistence, contributing to the development of multicultural communities.
(6) Universities
Universities will be responsible for the training of personnel engaged in multicultural coexistence, conducting research, and supporting the formulation of government policies. They will promote multicultural coexistence through supporting the local activities of international students.
(7) Elementary and Junior High Schools, High Schools, and Special Needs Schools
Education aimed at fostering a multicultural society will be promoted for all students. Furthermore, language learning support will be provided to foreign students, and in collaboration with local governments and private companies, they will support the autonomy of students and foreign parents.
(8) Japanese Citizens
Japanese citizens must understand the necessity of achieving multicultural coexistence and act so that foreigners can become independent and be recognized as members of the local society. In case of uncertainty on how to respond, they should utilize the multicultural coexistence consultation services established by municipalities and cooperate with multicultural coexistence policies and measures in Japan.
Securing Multilingual Experts
Before considering the securing of multilingual experts, it is necessary to first understand the current situation. At present, the profession of multilingual expert is often viewed as a volunteer role, with many cases where adequate remuneration is not provided. As a result, many experts are forced to work under unstable employment conditions such as self-employment or part-time jobs.
In such an environment, it becomes difficult to secure highly skilled multilingual experts, and there has been an increase in cases where people, due to circumstances such as “having free time,” are willing to work for low pay. As a result, foreigners who are not sufficiently skilled, knowledgeable, or experienced are tasked with interpretation and translation duties.
Additionally, due to work hour restrictions and the self-employed employment structure, enrollment in social insurance is not possible, and basic workers' rights such as paid leave or maternity leave are not guaranteed. In such a labor environment, highly skilled foreigners in language and specialized knowledge often give up on pursuing a career as multilingual experts and shift to other professions.
However, even if foreigners have high language abilities, they often find it difficult to be hired for regular positions because their Japanese language proficiency is generally lower than that of native Japanese. As a result, they are forced to work as temporary staff or part-time workers, and paradoxically, NPOs and local governments end up inadvertently promoting unstable employment forms.
To resolve this issue, it is essential to secure fair compensation for multilingual experts, create a stable working environment, and increase the recognition of the profession.
The national government, prefectures, municipalities, international exchange associations, and other organizations, as well as businesses and educational institutions, recognize the importance of securing multilingual experts. The need to "secure," "develop," and "train" such professionals is clearly outlined in various policies and documents related to multicultural coexistence. However, when we look at the actual situation, we see that positions like multicultural coordinator are primarily occupied by Japanese nationals, and foreigners with high language skills and expertise are often treated as volunteers.
Under such circumstances, it is no surprise that highly skilled multilingual experts are not secured, and the shortage continues. The profession of multilingual expert is not receiving proper recognition, and it can be said that it is being "underappreciated." To truly achieve multicultural coexistence in the future, it is essential to provide proper treatment for multilingual experts and establish the profession as a legitimate career.
On a national scale, there are municipalities and NGOs that employ individuals with high language proficiency. There are two main reasons for this, which I believe are as follows:
(1) Establishment of a Stable Work Environment
Even when the workload is large and the compensation does not match the level of expertise, the professionals can earn a sufficient income to support their living, as they are able to work full-time. Moreover, their status as workers is guaranteed, and an environment is provided where basic workers' rights, such as social insurance enrollment and the ability to take paid leave, can be exercised.
(2) Temporary Acceptance Due to Personal Circumstances
In some cases, even with unfavorable employment conditions, professionals may accept the work for a short period due to personal reasons. In such cases, they take on the role of multilingual experts regardless of their specialization or experience.
However, this kind of work environment is not established nationwide, and many multilingual professionals still work under unstable employment conditions. In the future, it will be necessary to create a system that ensures multilingual professionals are treated properly.
Ensuring a remuneration appropriate to their expertise and guaranteeing a sufficient income to live on is essential for retaining multilingual professionals. Without adequate compensation, their retention in the role will be difficult. Currently, many multilingual professionals work under unstable employment conditions, such as being self-employed or working part-time, and it is necessary to clarify employment contracts and secure a stable position through social insurance enrollment. Without guaranteeing basic rights such as paid leave, maternity leave, and paternity leave, it will be difficult to build a career as a multilingual professional. If such an environment is not established, skilled professionals will avoid this occupation.
Ultimately, securing multilingual professionals boils down to making the job a sustainable profession. Looking at past efforts and the current situation, it is clear that this has not been achieved. Anyone can understand the necessity of this if they consider it from their own perspective.
However, the need for multilingual professionals, available budgets, and other conditions vary from municipality to municipality, and because of this, the promotion of multicultural coexistence in Japan, as well as the implementation of multicultural policies, rely on private sector initiatives.
The obstacle to securing multilingual professionals is their employment conditions, but what prevents the improvement of these conditions is the institutional barriers. Municipalities have difficulties overcoming boundaries when implementing policies with public funds. Although agreements are made between municipalities to carry out large-scale projects, it is not easily achieved. NGOs, which depend on contract fees from specific municipalities, are also subject to the same restrictions. The government’s role is to conduct large-scale activities, providing clear guidelines on accepting foreigners and coexisting with foreign residents, while taking the necessary financial measures to support municipalities aiming for multicultural coexistence. In contrast, private companies can receive individual requests for services from municipalities or NGOs without bureaucratic hurdles, and they can accept service contracts from different prefectures or municipalities with ease. This enables the centralization of service requests in one place, allowing tasks to be efficiently distributed and enabling the same professionals to perform various duties. As a result, municipalities that were previously unable to implement multicultural policies due to budget constraints can now address these needs at a lower cost and secure the necessary funds. This way, it becomes possible to accommodate even languages with fewer speakers and secure multilingual professionals.
Privatization of Multicultural Coexistence Projects
Currently, the multicultural coexistence projects being implemented nationwide are, in practice, aimed at promoting multicultural coexistence, but many of them are originally international cooperation projects or foreigner support initiatives. Examples include the JET Program (ALT, CIR, SEA), international exchange programs, foreigner life support, Japanese language learning support, medical interpretation, communication support, and disaster prevention training for foreigners. Many of these activities were already being conducted before the awareness of multicultural coexistence. However, these projects do not primarily promote "multicultural coexistence"; rather, they are simply support projects for foreigners, which are of an opposite nature.
When Japan began to recognize "multicultural coexistence," these projects, due to their connection with foreigners and foreign languages, were included in the multicultural coexistence policies and grouped together under this label. However, there is a problem with the use of the term "promotion." The term "promotion" does not provide clear means to measure the progress of multicultural coexistence, and often, initiatives are considered successful as long as they are being used, regardless of the actual outcomes. For example, in international exchange events, even if the participants are mostly acquaintances or people involved with the organizers, the event may still be considered "successful," reflecting the lack of clear criteria. In theory, "promotion" should mean the advancement of activities and an increase in participants, but the progress of current multicultural coexistence projects is difficult to measure.
Given this context, it should be understood that the JET Program, international exchange programs, and foreigner support projects are independent initiatives aimed at "achieving multicultural coexistence." While they are important elements within the broader framework of promoting multicultural coexistence, they should be seen as projects with their own goals.
Additionally, the realization of multicultural coexistence in Japan should be viewed as a policy to maintain the positive effects of internationalization and transform its negative impacts in a constructive direction. This should be considered as a multicultural coexistence policy that aims to ensure the benefit of the entire Japanese population while promoting coexistence with foreigners. From this perspective, securing multilingual professionals is essential, and their role is crucial. Although there are institutional restrictions within local governments and NGOs, the private sector has the ability to efficiently accept delegations of tasks from different prefectures and cities. This indicates that multicultural coexistence projects should be privatized.
With privatization, bureaucratic processes and limitations can be eliminated, allowing for the efficient expansion of multicultural coexistence projects nationwide. This would enable the hiring of more professionals and the implementation of effective measures to achieve multicultural coexistence.