1

The 1995-2000 interprefectural migration of forThe 1995-2000 interprefectural migration of foreign residents of Japan:eign residents of Japan:

salient features and multivariate explanation salient features and multivariate explanation

Yoshitaka Ishikawa (Kyoto University, Japan)

and Kao-Lee Liaw (McMaster University, Canada)

The 4th International Conference on Population Geographies at Hong Kong, China, on 12 July, 2007

2

Existing literature focused Existing literature focused on foreign residents in Japanon foreign residents in Japan

◆There has been a proliferation of research since the mid-1980s, when massive immigration started.

◆ Foreigner rate is low (1.6% ） , but absolute number is large (approximately 2 million).

◆It is now an important research subject of all social sciences including geography.

3

Difficulty in studying migration Difficulty in studying migration of foreign residents in Japanof foreign residents in Japan

◆ No comprehensive source; general migration patterns have remained unknown.

◆ Published Reports of 2000 Census　 1) specific origins are unknown both for immigration and

internal migration

　 2) detailed migrants’ attributes are unknown

　⇒ special application to Japanese Statistics Bureau to obtain micro data samples

4

Three perspectives to explain Three perspectives to explain destination choicedestination choice

5

Comparison of interprefectural migration bComparison of interprefectural migration between foreign residents and total populatetween foreign residents and total populat

ionion　 　 　 　 　 　 　

　 　 Foreign　Residents 　 Total　Population

Groupings　of　Prefectures　 　

Net-migration Rate 　

Net-migration Rate

　 　 (Persons) (　%　) 　 (Persons) (　%　)

The　Three　Largest　Metropolitan　Areas

-570 -0.10 164,912 0.28

Tokyo Area 354 0.14 235,743 0.74

Nagoya Area 1,848 2.13 21,893 0.21

Osaka Area -2,772 -1.15 -92,724 -0.53

Metropolitan　Fringes 600 1.21 32,280 0.41

Manufacturing　Stronghold 1,894 4.45 -10,552 -0.16

Tohoku　Region -372 -2.44 -41,423 -0.44

Rest　of　Japan -1,552 -1.52 -145,217 -0.39

6

Net-migration rate of Japanese Net-migration rate of Japanese interprefectural migration, 1995-2000interprefectural migration, 1995-2000

　

7

Major foreign residents in Major foreign residents in JapanJapan(2000)(2000)

Census Alien registration

ethnicity 1,310,545 1,686,444 (1.03%) (1.33%)

Korean 528,904 635,269 Chinese 252,680 335,575 Brazil 188,190 254,394 Filipino 93,352 144,871 Others 247,419 316,335

8

General features by major General features by major ethnicityethnicity

(Persons) (%) (Persons) (%) (Persons) (%) (Persons) (%)

The　Three　LargestMetropolitan　Areas

-226 -0.07 790 0.90 -78 -0.22 -1,126 -2.82

Tokyo Area 1,378 1.40 812 1.39 -170 -0.63 -1,636 -11.14 Nagoya Area -12 -0.03 116 1.58 86 1.57 1,324 6.29 Osaka Area -1,592 -0.80 -138 -0.62 6 0.18 -814 -19.45

Metropolitan　Fringes 276 3.14 230 4.91 82 1.83 -106 -0.78

Manufacturing　Stronghold 130 1.44 -76 -1.67 -16 -0.44 1,510 8.39

Tohoku　Region -52 -0.72 -218 -6.90 54 2.98 -88 -8.49

Rest　of　Japan -128 -0.20 -726 -5.53 -42 -0.52 -158 -2.49

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

net-migration net-migration net-migration net-migration

6.6 14.9 9.5 25.4Groupings　of　Prefectures　

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

Korean　 Chinese Filipino Brazilian

9

General features General features by educational attainmentby educational attainment

(Persons) (%) (Persons) (%) (Persons) (%) (Persons) (%)

The　Three　LargestMetropolitan　Areas

-698 -0.58 -960 -0.41 150 0.31 826 0.73

Tokyo Area -724 -1.96 -1,076 -1.18 158 0.68 1,776 2.70 Nagoya Area 536 2.14 1,040 2.81 250 3.71 72 0.58 Osaka Area -510 -0.87 -924 -0.87 -258 -1.33 -1,022 -2.96

Metropolitan　Fringes 280 2.22 130 0.64 -8 -0.23 186 2.54Manufacturing　Stronghold 504 4.44 924 5.00 134 4.02 196 3.54Tohoku　Region -24 -0.77 14 0.21 -78 -6.83 -208 -6.19Rest　of　Japan -62 -0.24 -108 -0.25 -198 -2.75 -1,000 -5.56

19.19net-migration net-migration net-migration net-migration

University

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

interprefecturalmigration　rate(%)

Groupings　of　Prefectures　

Less　than　HS High　School College

7.31 8.77 13.11

10

Nested logit modelNested logit model

　 Departure sub-model:

　　　 ⇒ dependent variable: choice probability of stay in, or departure from, the prefecture of usual residence in 1995

⇒sample size: 69,308 persons

　Destination choice sub-model :

⇒ dependent variable: choice probability of a particular destination among 46 prefectures

⇒ sample size: 42,301 persons

11

Explanatory variablesExplanatory variables

　 Individual attributes <De, DC> : age, educational attainment, sex, ethnicity, family status

Labour market related <De, DC> : employment opportunity, income level

　 Co-ethnic attraction <De, DC>

Marital opportunity : <De, DC>

Prefectural size <De, DC>

Competition with new immigrants <De, DC>

Spatial separation <DC>: distance, contiguity

Inclusive variable <De>

12

Why is international marriage in Why is international marriage in Tohoku region important?Tohoku region important?

● The stem family system is dominant in such region as Tohoku. To maintain this system, marriage is essential for household head’s son as successor.

●Due to imbalanced sex ratio, the issue of marriage squeeze for male population is serious in eastern half of Japan.

⇒Tohoku has both the first and second conditions. Unless household head’s son find Japanese new bride, he tends to look for his bride with foreign nationality.

13

New Immigration and Interprefectural MigrationNew Immigration and Interprefectural Migration

0 400km

都 道 府 県 別 に み た 外 国 人 の 国 外 か ら の 転 入 と 転 入 超 過

（ 人 ）

500 100 0- 500

net i nt er nal mi gr at i on

40000人100001000

f r om oveseas

14

Application result Application result of departure submodelof departure submodel

　

Explanatory　Variable Coef. t-ratio

Constant -3.4798 -61.2

Personal Attributes　College　Educ. 1.2311 4.0University　Educ. 2.6369 10.5　Male 0.0620 2.2　Aged　15-19 0.6846 10.1Aged　20-24 1.1576 20.9Aged　25-29 1.2404 24.5Aged　30-34 1.1491 22.9Aged　35-39 0.9135 17.7Aged　40-44 0.6441 11.3Aged　45-49 0.3815 6.0　Chinese 0.3221 6.2Brazilian 1.2124 10.7Filipino -0.2421 -3.8　Yome -0.2922 -2.0

Place Attributes and Interactions　Manufacturing　Employment　Growth　*Brazilian

-0.0604 -6.7　Income　Level　*　College　Educ. -0.2649 -2.9Income　Level　*　University　Educ. -0.5534 -6.9　Ethnic　Similarity　*　Korean -0.0287 -9.2Ethnic　Similarity　*　Chinese -0.0130 -4.1Ethnic　Similarity　*　Brazilian -0.0610 -10.0Ethnic　Similarity　*　University　Educ. 0.0084 2.0　New　Immigration 0.0550 10.1　Bridal　Opportunity　*　Brazilian　Tsuma -0.0239 -2.5Stem　Family　Region　*　Yome -2.4630 -2.0　Ln(Employment　Size) -0.1853 -5.0　Inclusive　Variable 0.0374 1.2

Rho-square 0.1178

15

Application result of destination choice suApplication result of destination choice submodelbmodel

　

Explanatory　Variable Coef. t-ratio　Manufacturing Employment Growth * Brazilian 0.1869 22.3Manufacturing Employment Growth * Filipino 0.0585 3.3Service Employment Growth * Korean 0.0295 3.4Service Employment Growth * Chinese 0.0805 7.2Service Employment Growth * Filipino 0.0451 2.0　Income Level * High School Educ. 0.1999 2.6Income Level * College or University Educ. 0.5431 7.6　Ethnic Similarity * Korean 0.0376 9.2Ethnic Similarity * Chinese 0.0227 5.3Ethnic Similarity * Brazilian 0.0727 14.8Ethnic Similarity * Filipino 0.0258 2.2Ethnic Similarity * College Educ. -0.0114 -2.0Ethnic Similarity * University Educ. -0.0160 -3.5　New Immigration * At Most High School Educ. -0.0387 -5.2　Stem Family Region * Yome 0.9704 2.0　Ln(Employment Size) 0.8382 24.1　Distance * At Most College Educ -0.7465 -31.9Distance * University Educ. -0.5486 -20.9Contiguity 0.5774 13.5Rho-square 0.2887

16

ConclusionConclusion

Major destinations: Nagoya metropolitan area, manufacturing stronghold (not Tokyo metropolitan area)

Highly mobile persons: Brazilian, graduates from university

Application result of nested logit model <departure sub-model> ethnicity, age, educational attainment, c

ompetition with new immigrants, co-ethnic attraction <destination choice sub-model> spatial separation, prefectural si

ze, employment opportunity, co-ethnic attraction

17

Implications of the Implications of the findingsfindings

Comparison of explanatory power of international marraige between new immigration and interprefectural migration: Role of international marriage in the former is larger than that in the latter.

Comparison of migration pattern between foreigner and Japanese: Net inflow to Tokyo metropolitan area for Japanese is much larger than that for foreigner.

⇒Interprefectural migration by foreign residents has contributed to a reduction of “monopolar concentration in Tokyo”.

”⇒ hollowization” of manufacturing employment opportunity may lead to an intensification of “monopolar concentration in Tokyo”.