|

Ambivalent Japan turns on its ‘insular’ youth

System discourages overseas study but students get blame

by Chris Burgess

On March 15, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe officially announced Japan’s participation in Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free-trade negotiations. Japan’s decision to join the talks shows that at least some in government have accepted the fact that “opening up” Japan is in the nation’s best long-term interests.

“If Japan does not participate in the negotiations,” warns the draft proposal compiled by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s committee on TPP issues, “it will be unable to take advantage of growth in the Asia-Pacific region.” In this sense, Japan’s participation in the TPP is very much a litmus test of its commitment to globalization.

Opposition, however, remains strong to the TPP specifically, and to globalization in general. Japan’s ambivalence towards opening up is illustrated by recent calls to secure global human resources (gurōbaru jinzai). These resources are increasingly portrayed as absolutely crucial for Japan’s future in the face of its global competitive decline. On the other hand, talk of global human resources is often accompanied by hand-wringing over Japan’s inward-looking (uchimuki) passive youth who are seemingly less and less interested in venturing outside Japan.

Certainly, the number of Japanese studying and working abroad in recent years has fallen significantly. As the graph shows, since a peak of 82,945 Japanese studying abroad in 2004, numbers have dropped significantly, roughly returning to the level they were at in 1995. Since the most popular destination for Japanese students has always been (and remains) the U.S., the rapid fall in Japanese students attending American universities has been the focus of attention: In terms of numbers of foreign students studying at U.S. universities, Japanese ranked 7th in 2011-12 at 19,900, down 60 percent from the peak of around 47,000 in 1997-98, when Japan was America’s largest source of students.

Behind criticism of uchimuki youth lies the fear that Japan is being overtaken by its closest neighbors. Media reports often highlight the rapid rise of Chinese and South Korean students studying in the U.S., the implication being that Japan is being left behind in the race to develop global human resources. “In a Japan that is showing signs of being pushed aside by China and South Korea’s focus on the economic sphere,” lamented the Yomiuri Shimbun in a front-page August 2012 article, “it is said that the youngsters who have to shoulder the burden of the next generation are uchimuki.”

The question is, however, whether an “inward-looking orientation” (uchimuki shikō) among young people is the main reason behind the fall in Japanese studying abroad. A 2010 survey by the British Council found that the majority of Japanese high school and university students were actually interested in studying overseas, and if anything had become more interested over the past five years. The survey highlighted worries over safety, expenses and negative influences on school/work as reasons why youngsters ultimately didn’t go abroad.

A 2010 Sanno Institute of Management survey on the “global consciousness” of new employees produced similar findings. While 49 percent replied that they didn’t want to work overseas at all (up from 29.2 percent in 2001), the most common reason given was the “risk” involved. Although “risk” was not specified, the deterioration of the economic situation from 2008 — a period that saw the number adverse to going abroad jump from a third to almost a half of respondents — suggests financial risk, echoing the British Council survey.

What is interesting here is how the uchimuki mentality is offered as the reason for falling numbers when a closer look at the data suggests social and economic conditions may offer a better explanation. Perhaps the problem is less about young people — who are typically blamed for all sorts of social ills — and more about society and the companies that hire youngsters. In particular, Japan’s rigid and inflexible job-hunting system — currently in the middle of a “super ice age” — has been picked out as particularly problematic.

Although a number of high-profile Japanese companies — such as Rakuten and Fast Retailing — have taken concrete measures to cultivate global human resources, not all Japanese companies seem eager to move away from traditional employment models. Indeed, there is evidence that Japanese hierarchical corporate culture is not necessarily comfortable with confident and outspoken returnee students. A long article in The New York Times last year described the experiences of a number of Japanese with study-abroad experience who found Japanese companies unenthusiastic and even reluctant to hire them. The article cites a survey of 1,000 Japanese companies on their recruitment plans in which less than a quarter said in fiscal 2012 they planned to hire Japanese applicants who had studied abroad.

Japanese companies’ lack of global awareness has been criticized both in and outside Japan. The trade ministry’s Global Human Resource Development Committee described top management’s inaction as the same as sitting idly by, literally “waiting to die” (zashite shi o matsu). Jennifer Stout, U.S. deputy assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific affairs, offered similar criticism. Talking about the drop in Japanese students studying in the U.S., Stout rejected stereotypical discussions of uchimuki youth, suggesting that Japanese corporate culture doesn’t always rate overseas experience and English ability. Indeed, overseas experience can even be a disadvantage for job-hunters.

In its recent proposal to lower the grade when elementary school students start studying English, the government’s Education Rebuilding Implementation Council noted that students in many Asian countries begin much earlier than in Japan. Writing about the relationship between Japan and the English language — particularly Japan’s slowness, compared to its Asian neighbors, in introducing English as a regular subject in elementary schools — Nobuyuki Honna, a professor emeritus at Aoyama Gakuin University, suggests that there is a deep-seated notion in Japan of English not as a global language but as something that belongs to someone else — to Britain and the United States.

This attitude epitomizes Japan’s ambivalent attitude towards globalization. On the one hand, the country is aware that in order to remain economically competitive it must open up, instigate reforms and embrace globalization in all its aspects; on the other, there remains a strong tendency to close in, reject global norms and standards, and retreat inwards. The discussions over global human resources capture the dilemma of a country caught in two minds, a quandary that explains Abe’s ultra-cautious approach to entering even negotiations over TPP.

One of the biggest ironies in these discussions on global human resources is how young people have been made scapegoats for Japan’s failure to resolve this dilemma. Thus, Japan’s problems in attracting and securing such resources are typically explained not by the rigid job-hunting system, parochial immigration policies or conservative corporate culture, but by inward-looking uchimuki youth.

In sum, it may be more accurate to talk of an uchimuki government or even society, one that remains rooted in an insular world view that sees globalization as an external process, something owned by somebody else. Just how far Japan is prepared to emerge from its global hibernation will become clear in October when the 12 TPP countries meet at the sidelines of APEC to hammer out a basic agreement.

Chris Burgess teaches Japanese and Australian Studies at Tsuda College, Tokyo. He would like to thank Tomoko Hoshino and all of his 2012 4th-year seminar at Tsuda— living proof of the fallacy of uchimuki youth — for their insightful comments and stimulating discussions on this topic. Send your comments and story ideas to community@japantimes.co.jp.

  • http://twitter.com/dahliapham Dahlia Pham

    This explains why Japan is lagging behind in growth and creativity. While the rest of the world is forging ahead embracing new business ventures and ideas, Japan’s inability to adapt and follow along is carving out a bleak future for young Japanese professionals. It’s sad that they are not following the leads of Rakuten and Fast Retailing, as I find they’ve shown to be exemplary companies who have shown innovation without losing their Japanese roots. Globalization can be achieved, but it doesn’t mean that they have to forgo everything that they know.

    I have to say I wish Japanese youths and companies were more daring, I mean it’s the reason why large Japanese companies like Sony and Honda came about to what they are today isn’t it? Because after the WWII, bold and daring youths took chances. Why hasn’t this attitude been passed onto today’s generation? How can you expect to grow and be ahead of the game if you’re just going to shut your eyes and ears to the world and bury your head in the ground like an ostrich?

    • kyushuphil

      “Why hasn’t this attitude [youth taking chances] been passed onto today’s generation?”

      The schools.

      Japanese kids by junior high are still open, curious, energetic. It all gets killed in high school. So much cramming of so much really stupid, inert, meaningless information. So little interest shown by the adults for any individual writing. So many robotically regimented classes. Such insipid, dull, history-divorced textbooks.

      • http://getironic.blogspot.com/ getironic

        They have these kinds of schools and lessons because the government is in control of education. You want individual writing? Advocate that the state to get out of the way.

  • http://www.facebook.com/scott.north1 Scott North

    The cost of college in the US has risen by 60% over the last decade. Foreign students get no breaks on tuition. Certainly higher cost has something to do with the drop in Japanese young people venturing to the US to study. In the last 6 months the yen has fallen more than 25% against the dollar. Further falls in the number of students going abroad are likely to follow.

  • Habidaccus

    I too would be more inclined to blame corporate culture if not Japanese culture as a whole, which seems to repeat a pattern of being static for long periods of time, followed by rapid change in relatively short spurts, a la the unification, the meiji period, the post-war period, the bubble, etc. However, if anything, this habit also suggests that the next wave of readjustment is imminent, and will help Japan catch up to the rest of the world.

  • Toolonggone

    It’s so sad to shift the blame on young people for economic and civic decline of nation. The harsh reality is that one third of workers are non-regular (hi-sei-shain) workers who are doing almost the same work as regular workers but getting paid far less. Many of those are not gonna get promoted to the position that guarantees job security. And very few numbers of international-minded corporations like— such as Rakuten or Uniquo are interested in recruiting young Japanese college graduate. Many big corporations have just started shaking up their labor force, so it’s unlikely that they would hire some numbers of international-minded young students. Abe’s national reform policy fits only with a tiny segment of people lucky enough to be born to the family belonging super-upper income or the class of 1%.

    • zer0_0zor0

      And the temp worker system was introduced by Bush protege Koizumi, adopted from the system used in the USA which only benefits the “investor class”.

      The last thing Japan should do is follow the dysfunctional policies of the USA.

  • http://getironic.blogspot.com/ getironic

    Why is “opening up” equated with the TPP?

    You can be for “opening up” and against the TPP.

    For example, I am pro-water. I like to drink water, but don’t call me anti-water just because I won’t drink a glass of 95% water 5% deadly poison.

    This “growth” requires giving up too much control and sovereignty. It is not worth the price of admission. If Japan’s cultural socialism hadn’t destroyed so much productivity for the last 20+ years, the government wouldn’t be feeling this kind of pressure to negotiate. Instead they’d be the ones dictating the terms of any such agreements.