研究ノート

RESEARCH NOTEAn Assessment of Foreign Resident Services
through the Public Outreach Project for Fostering
Intercultural Coexistence in Nagoya
Yoko AOKI, Ami KATO, and David GREEN

Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1（Mar. 2018）

An Assessment of Foreign Resident Services
through the Public Outreach Project for Fostering
Intercultural Coexistence in Nagoya
Yoko AOKI ＊ , Ami KATO ＊＊ , and David GREEN ＊＊＊Abstract
While local-level service provision for foreign residents in Japan is often considered in a negative light,
this paper aims to build a more nuanced understanding. Utilizing data from a multifaceted research study,
including interviews with city officials, concerned organizations and foreign residents themselves, wefind that while foreign residents in the Nagoya area are generally satisfied with the services offered tothem, additional improvements can be made in foreign resident service provision. In particular, we notea strong overlap in organization functions on the one hand, and a concentration of funds in governmentdesignated agencies on the other. To further improve service provision, additional cooperation between
public and private organizations is necessary, in both information dissemination and funding activities.
Keywords: Foreign Residents, Service Provision, Nagoya

1. Introduction
During the 2014―2015 academic year, a group of students at the Nagoya University Graduate Schoolof International Development implemented a project termed the “Public Outreach Project for Fostering
Intercultural Coexistence in Nagoya”, abbreviated as POPIC.1 The project’s mission was to obtain aground-level understanding of how foreign resident-focused services in the area are doing. Scholarly
research on immigrant incorporation and immigrant services in Japan often paint a somewhat negative
picture (Ishikawa 2012; Sugisawa 2011), but a considerable amount of research either overlooks the
Nagoya area (Machimura 2000; Yamanaka 2006) or is now dated (Brody 2002; Pak 2000). Looking tofill this void, as well as to provide some practical insight to local-level practitioners and stakeholders,
POPIC conducted a multifaceted research initiative, aiming to obtain an updated and comprehensive
picture of the services provided to foreign residents in the greater Nagoya area.
This paper is a summation of the main project findings. The paper is divided into reviews ofseveral important aspects of foreign resident service: foreign resident assessments, service reviews
*
**
***

Doctoral student of Graduate School of International Development, Nagoya University.
Master of Graduate School of International Development, Nagoya University, POPIC project coordinator.
Associate Professor, Nagoya University Graduate School of Law.

1

Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)of primary city and prefecture-designated providers including the Nagoya International Center and the
Aichi International Association, and practitioner interviews. We briefly cover each of these four areas,
providing a summary and analysis of the findings before offering conclusions.

2. Foreign Resident Surveys
2.1. Survey Background
As of 2016, the number of foreign residents in Nagoya is 72,683. The largest numbers bynationality are Chinese (30.3%), followed by Korean (22%), Philippine (11.6%), Vietnamese (7.6%) andBrazilian (5.2%) (Nagoya City 2017). To obtain a general understanding of the Nagoya-area foreign
population, as well as how they feel about the services targeting them, this paper primarily focuses on
two surveys. The first is Nagoya city’s 2010 foreign resident survey (Nagoya City 2011).2 The second
is from our own POPIC survey, administered June through August 2015, asking foreign residents
about their usage of and satisfaction with local city services.3 Although the POPIC survey may beless representative than the city survey, it updates city findings, also asking questions that were
not included in the Nagoya city survey.4 Three broad topics are addressed here: Japanese language
abilities, children’s education, and overall satisfaction with local services.
2.2. Survey Results
Nagoya city survey respondents tend to skew toward long-term and permanent residents, withaverage residency in Japan being 10.6 years, and average residency in Nagoya at 9.0 years. POPIC
survey data was less oriented toward long-term residents, with 36% of respondents in Japan overseven years, 19% in Japan four to six years, and 45% between zero and three years.
Survey findings indicate that Japanese language ability is of fundamental importance to foreign
residents. On the Nagoya city survey, 47% of respondents self-assessed as advanced speakers ofJapanese, compared to only 13% on the POPIC survey. The Nagoya city survey correspondingly had
fewer basic-level Japanese speakers (31%) compared to the POPIC data (41%). Additionally, both
Nagoya and POPIC surveys show less fluency in written Japanese, with 10% in the Nagoya survey and
17% in the POPIC survey respectively self-reporting as functionally illiterate in Japanese.
When asked whether they are currently studying Japanese, the Nagoya city survey reports 42%
are indeed studying, while POPIC data shows 66% studying Japanese. Although findings are notconclusive because of the smaller sample size, the POPIC survey additionally shows some positive
correlation between Japanese language ability and income level. Additionally, one of the mostimportant issues foreign residents note in the Nagoya city free-response section is a desire forJapanese language study support.
Moving on to children’s education, it is worth noting that only a minority of foreign residents2Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

have school-aged children. The Nagoya city survey shows 23% of respondents with children inschool, while the POPIC survey demographic is 29%. Most foreign residents appear to be relatively
satisfied with the level of support offered, with 80% of Nagoya survey respondents with children being“generally happy” with school services. The primary complaints which parents had were over aninsufficient amount of Japanese as a second language courses offered (33%) and not enough teachers or
administrators that speak the child’s native language (22%). Overall, most parents (73%) felt that theirchild spoke enough Japanese to follow along in class reasonably well.
Lastly, general foreign resident satisfaction should be considered. Although the Nagoya city
survey did not ask this seemingly important question, the POPIC survey finds most respondents
mostly satisfied: 29% are very satisfied and 32% are somewhat satisfied. Only 14% of respondents
were somewhat unsatisfied or very unsatisfied, while 25% were neutral. When asked about areas
for improvement, one Brazilian resident complained that letters relating to taxes and social security
benefits were generally written in Japanese. Another Brazilian resident mentioned that she wanted
to get tax information in Portuguese. A Pakistani national noted the lack of available Halal food in
the area, while a Vietnamese resident considered the duration of Japanese language classes to be
insufficient. Residents mentioned that they want more “multilingual services”, additional Englishlanguage services available to residents that do not speak Japanese, and information on Japanese
language courses available in the area.
2.3. Discussion
In each of the areas briefly addressed above - Japanese language, children’s education and generalsatisfaction - one thing is immediately apparent: Japanese language ability is essential for foreign
residents. Without at least a basic level of Japanese, it is extremely difficult for a foreign resident tomanage even simple tasks. Although multilingual services are often available, they are limited andresidents may be unaware of their existence.
As for language programs, there is a general lack of information. Agencies such as the Nagoya
International Center and the Aichi International Association provide information on Japanese language
classes in the area, but this is only useful to individuals already aware of these agencies. Furthermore,each agency is typically only aware of and promoting a particular subset of language programs, making
the foreign resident unable to obtain a comprehensive picture of service. This decentralized and often
piecemeal administration of an essential service is thus more inconvenient and time-consuming toaccess than necessary. It would be useful to administer some kind of database or central storage of thetypes of language programs available to foreign residents, and to promote such a database. Reducing
the cost in finding a suitable program would help to increase language program enrollments, andultimately language proficiency overall.
Moving to children’s education, we find similar issues. Most foreign parents seem to believe their

3Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

children speak decent Japanese, at least enough to participate in school activities. However, there
appears to be a significant minority lacking a sufficient Japanese ability. Additionally, while the majorityof foreign parents are satisfied with the support their children receive, there is a strong minoritythat remain unsatisfied. The main driving force in education dissatisfaction is likely to be low levels
of Japanese comprehension. It appears that one of the main problems impeding foreign children’s
education is the same one that adults encounter: acquiring the necessary language skills first.
Finally, we turn to foreign resident satisfaction with city services. Residents in Nagoya reportbeing generally happy with the level of services offered. Their assessment appears to be relatively
optimistic. Foreign residents may well be genuinely satisfied with the level of services available,
where all of their needs are addressed and expectations met. Alternatively, higher levels of satisfaction
may be associated with comparative service provision: cities in immigrants’ home countries may notoffer the level of information, language services or educational assistance that Nagoya does. Having
been conditioned to perhaps expect a lower level of service, local foreign residents may in fact feelsatisfied with Nagoya’s efforts. Regardless, services can be further improved. We note additional
areas for improvement in the following sections, starting with the Nagoya International Center.

3. Nagoya International Center
The Nagoya International Center (NIC) was founded in 1984 to provide international information
to city residents. Rather than its current conception as a central location for foreign resident-focusedservices, the center initially supplied information for Japanese residents going abroad. Following the1990 revision of Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act and the relatively large influx offoreign residents to Nagoya, the center changed to its current focus in the early 1990s. Because the
NIC maintains official ties to city government, it is designated as the central locale for foreign resident
services and information provision. Management is semi-autonomous, where budget and oversightis provided by the city Mayor’s office, although day-to-day management is conducted in-house. As apart of the POPIC project, members interviewed NIC officials in June 2015 and conducted a thoroughreview of their in-person and online services and offerings.
3.1. NIC Services
Being the city-designated point of contact for foreign residents, the NIC provides an array ofservices. The most basic and perhaps furthest-reaching service available is multilingual information.
As new foreign residents in Nagoya often possess rudimentary, if any, Japanese speaking and reading
ability, basic information is available in Japanese, English, Chinese, Korean, Portuguese, Spanish,
Tagalog and Vietnamese through the center. Other primary services include a multilingual information
desk, consultation services, and interpretation. Through the information desk, residents can obtain4Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

information on topics including health care, Japanese language schools, daily-living, and municipal
information including taxes, trash collection and city services. Inquiries are free, and can be made inperson, by phone or email. Japanese, English, Portuguese, Spanish and Chinese language assistance isgenerally offered during normal working hours, while Korean and Tagalog assistance is more limited.
Vietnamese language assistance is also available, but limited to twice a month (NIC 2016a).
Consultation services are likewise free of charge, and divided into legal, civic advising, mental
health, education, and refugee/asylum seeker subcategories. Legal consultations are not clearly
explained on the NIC website, but are provided by the Aichi bar association and presumably for lawyerrelated issues. Civic advisory consultations are given by administrative lawyers, and include anything
related to government administration such as immigration, taxation and national health insurance.
Mental health counseling is intended for those having “difficulty with their lives” in Japan. Education
consultations are for residents interested in learning Japanese, foreign children enrolling in theJapanese school system, Japanese returnees from abroad, and foreign residents intending to return totheir home country. Refugee and asylum-seeker consultations are provided in conjunction with a semiofficial refugee organization called Refugee Assistance Headquarters (NIC 2016b).
Interpretation services offered through the NIC are phone-based and free of charge. The NIC
utilizes a trio phone system, where the center arranges a phone call between the user, an NIC
translator, and a third party. Third party recipients of the phone translator system are not explicitly
identified, but are intended to be official entities such as city ward offices, educational facilities orhealth centers. Translation services are available in English, Portuguese and Spanish during typicalbusiness hours and weekends, while Chinese, Korean and Tagalog availability is more limited. As withinformation services, Vietnamese translation services are available, but limited to twice a month (NIC
2016c).
In addition to the aforementioned services, NIC maintains a detailed website with up-to-date
information on a variety of topics of interest to foreign residents. Topics covered include a Nagoya city
living guide, disaster preparedness, things to do in and around Nagoya, information on child and adulteducation, the pension system, welfare, immigration, taxes, local health services, municipal services,
and a number of other topics. However, varying levels of information are available depending on thelanguage used when browsing the website.
3.2. NIC Service Provision
In speaking with NIC staff, they consider the consultation function as one of their most important
activities. In particular, mental health consultations are something quite unique to be offered throughcity-level government to foreign residents in their native language, and actually serve to attract foreign
residents from outside of Nagoya city and Aichi Prefecture.
Consultations are reportedly given in a manner very similar to what Japanese natives receive. That5

Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

is, the counselor will listen to the foreign resident, provide information as needed and refer them toother organizations as necessary. The primarily difference, as perceived by NIC administrators, is thelanguage barrier and the additional concern of immigration-related issues. The consultation system isthus reliant on the will and initiative of the foreign consultor. Little follow-through is available on thepart of counselors.
NIC administrators report that the variety of consultation topics and languages are both increasing.
There has been an increase in consultations relating to domestic violence, child abuse issues, welfare
benefits, and issues relating to families including marriage, divorce, child nationality and parental
rights. Likewise, complicated issues that cannot be solved by simple consultation are also increasing.
Domestic violence and child abuse issues, for example, often have no clear-cut solutions that a
relatively brief consultation can adequately address. Issues around disability are similarly noted as
falling outside of what simple consultations can assist with.
Consultor diversity is similarly increasing. As the foreign population of Nagoya and surrounding
locales grow more diverse, so do individuals seeking assistance. The NIC has seen increased inquiries
coming from Nepalese, Uzbek and Vietnamese residents in particular. With very limited Vietnamese
support and none in Nepalese or Uzbek (or Russian), multilingual services have been stretched. Whilethe largest level of service is available in English, aside from Japanese, foreign residents are not always
proficient in English. Realizing this shortcoming, the NIC has been placing greater emphasis on
providing information in more “simplified” Japanese as a way to reach other language speakers.
3.3. NIC Critique
While the NIC offers useful and centralized services to foreign and native residents of the city andsurrounding area, there are a number of actions that can be taken to improve the delivery of NIC’s
services and its overall mission. Such actions mainly involve more equally and uniformly providing
information to residents.
To start, Japanese and non-Japanese language navigation of the NIC website contains considerable
differences. The site maintains a detailed monthly event calendar, only available in English andPortuguese. Other language versions of the site make no reference to the events calendar. The
Japanese version of the site appears to be aimed at Japanese residents rather than foreign residents,
with more space devoted to the center’s history and mission. Some similarities do exist as well: forexample, all languages provide the Nagoya living guide with very basic daily living information. Yet incontrast, the Spanish language version of the site does not include information on translation services,even though they are offered in Spanish. To provide a sense of uniformity in usage, the NIC could
simply include the same information in each language, in a consistent style.
Similarly, consultations are quite limited in the times offered for some languages. While there
is little doubt the intentions are good in offering multilingual information services, by providing

6Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

differential access days and times for different groups it becomes considerably less user-friendly. Suchlimited availability may also not coincide with individual work schedules. A more uniform offering ofmultilingual support would be useful.
NIC administrators note the necessity of providing information in simplified Japanese. For foreign
residents not proficient in Japanese or the other languages already addressed, simplified Japanese may
be the best way to go forward. As the NIC is one of the officially-designated organizations addressing
foreign resident issues, this should be prioritized, particularly for the NIC website.
While consultation services are undoubtedly useful for foreign residents, NIC consultations areadmittedly limited. The International Center is at best a starting point, where foreign residents are
only able to obtain introductory-level information. That mental health consultations are available andattract foreign residents from outside of the immediate area speaks to the already limited nature ofsuch services. Given this reality, mental health services could be expanded. The Aichi International
Association, for one, is able to offer more comprehensive counseling services through theirmulticultural social workers, but are often lacking in cases. Where the NIC has more direct access to alarger number of foreign residents requiring a higher level of assistance, it would make sense for thesegroups to work more closely together.
Finally, despite being the most prominent foreign resident service center in the city and region,
the NIC remains underpublicized. In its foreign resident survey, Nagoya city found only 48% of
respondents had even heard of the NIC. Of those, only 55% had used some kind of service (Nagoya
City 2011: 81―86). In other words, only a fraction of foreign residents are aware of the center’s
existence, and only a fraction of them have actually used any NIC services. The picture is worse forJapanese residents: in a 2013 city survey, only 23% of native residents report awareness of activities of
the NIC (Nagoya City 2014: 5). Clearly, more should be done to promote the center.

4. Aichi International Association
The Aichi International Association (AIA) is another significant, semi-independent organization
tasked with assisting foreign residents in Aichi prefecture. The original association was founded as “theAichi Overseas Emigration Association” in 1960. It was reorganized and formally established in 1984.
The AIA began a consultation window aimed at providing information and assistance to the prefecture’s
growing Latin-American community in 1991. Its own dedicated facilities were set up in 1997 andit continues to maintain close ties with prefectural government. POPIC members interviewed AIA
administrators in June 2015 and reviewed their in-person and online offerings as a part of the project.
4.1. AIA Service Provision
Like the Nagoya International Center, the AIA maintains an office with an information desk available

7

Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

for drop-in consultations. Consultation languages include Japanese, English, Spanish, Portuguese,
Tagalog and Chinese (AIA 2016a).
Aside from providing general multilingual information, the AIA’s primary activities are providing
consultations for foreign residents and dispatching multicultural social workers. Consultations aredone for free, in-person with prior reservation twice a month. Supported languages include Japanese,
English, Portuguese, Spanish and Chinese (AIA 2016b). Although the AIA website specifies that
consultations are “legal”, it separately notes in a “consultation examples” section that they can include
categories not limited to the legal sphere. These include daily life issues, education, health care,
pension, study abroad, and volunteering (AIA 2016c). Consultations on legal issues are facilitated bylawyers.
Actual consultations are somewhat different from the AIA mission as espoused. Most consultations
occur in Japanese and are reportedly from concerned NGOs working with foreign residents, local city
offices with foreign resident-related inquiries, or in some cases foreign residents who do not speak theother supported languages.
The hiring and dispatch of multicultural social workers is something quite unique. AIA’s
multicultural social worker program is actually the first of its kind in Japan and a potential modelto other locales. Multicultural social worker duties are similar to other social workers in Japan,
where they are able to go in the field and provide continuous support for complicated cases. The
main difference is in their awareness of and exposure to other cultures, and fluency in their target
population’s language. As of June 2015, the AIA employed four multicultural social workers on a parttime basis.
In addition to consultations and social worker support, the AIA co-sponsors Japanese language
classes for foreign residents, issues prefectural handbooks, maintains a library and provides rental
facilities for foreign and international exchange groups. Japanese language courses are offered withvolunteer instructors, for a fee of 2000 yen per semester.
4.2. AIA Service Critique
Perhaps the strongest critique against the Aichi International Association is a lack of awarenessand publicity. Many foreign residents simply do not know of the AIA’s existence. Where the AIA
had 700 unique consultations in 2014, the Nagoya International Center had 5,734 information counter
visitations and 911 formal consultations during the same period. The Nagoya city website has a direct
link to the NIC, yet no such connections for the AIA. The AIA additionally is in a much less accessible
location, being nearest to the city mayor’s office, not centrally located for residents. The NIC, bycontrast, is directly accessible by subway, and a short walk from one of Nagoya’s main subway and train
stations. Perhaps more disconcerting, AIA’s multicultural social workers only covered nine actual
cases during 2014. In spite of being a unique and potentially useful service, AIA’s multicultural social

8Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

workers are under-utilized.
Another significant problem the AIA confronts is service duplication. Legal and general-living
consultations are also provided by the Nagoya International Center. The AIA is unable to provide thebreadth of multilingual consultations that the NIC does, and AIA consultations are actually utilized
more by Japanese nationals than foreign residents. One could argue that the AIA targets the fullprefecture rather than Nagoya city in particular, but NIC explicitly notes that it accepts consultations
from anyone in the area. Spending the limited resources available on services that overlap with otheragencies may not be their most effective use.
AIA website navigation is quite inconsistent and very limited in languages aside from Japanese.
The Japanese site provides considerably more information compared to other languages. Navigation
is rudimentary and in some cases information is out of date. Because the region is experiencing adiversification of its foreign population, many of whom are not proficient in the languages provided,
it is also increasingly important to provide information in simplified Japanese. The AIA website andguidebooks fail in this regard.
Because the website is often the first stop for interested parties, information should be clearly andconsistently displayed. To illustrate, the AIA website is inconsistent in the types of consultations
offered. Are consultations only legal, or are other types available? What exactly do consultations
entail? How long might they last? Who provides the consultations? Such basic questions should beclearly answered.
Lastly, more information is needed on the Japanese language courses offered through the AIA. Who
are the instructors? Even if they are volunteers, what are their qualifications? What texts are used?
Although the Japanese language courses are certainly inexpensive, as presented course organization
looks very unclear. Is there a curriculum? How are speaking and reading levels assessed? For potential
students, it would be very worthwhile to answer these questions on the program website.
In sum, the AIA offers some unique services to prefectural residents, particularly the employmentof multicultural social workers. Unfortunately, there is major overlap of some of AIA’s other primary
services with designated government bodies, creating significant redundancies. More fundamentally,
thus far the AIA has not created a viable means of informing foreign residents of its existence or givena reasonable explanation of the types of services it offers. The AIA would be well served coordinating
and pooling efforts with the NIC in particular, working to avoid redundancies in services and to
mutually promote each groups’ strengths.

5. Practitioner Interviews
To further understand the role of local foreign resident service providers, we conducted email
interviews with four city practitioners. These are ground-level individuals working for support

9Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

organizations through city offices or in the private sector, often both. Practitioners were contacted
through personal networks, and thus do not represent a random sample of local service providers.
However, these individuals work directly in the field with foreign residents providing on-the-groundsupport. Their insights consequently warrant consideration.
First, local practitioners appear highly motivated in trying to assist foreign residents. Most held
multiple positions, some through official city channels, while at the same time working with local
nonprofits or nongovernmental organizations. One individual, for example, holds three somewhat
overlapping positions: an interpreter at a municipal employment service center, a volunteer staff
member at a local NGO, and a member of Aichi Prefecture’s Disaster Victims Support Center, targeting
foreign residents. Practitioners appear to bring a strong commitment to their field, even whencompensation for their efforts may be limited.
Services provided by the practitioners interviewed were largely oriented around consultations.
While other services may indeed be necessary for foreign residents, consultations appear to be quite
widespread. Consultations can cover a wide gamut of subject areas, and as such often function as an
initial line of inquiry for foreign residents. Because navigating Japanese bureaucratic institutions canoften prove difficult and time-consuming for residents with limited language skills, multiple points for
consultation help foreign residents to obtain necessary information with less effort. However, as noted
above, overlapping consultation functions also bring a level of redundancy when organizations offer
similar services.
Other services provided by practitioners interviewed include translation between Japanese and aforeign language, in some cases physically accompanying foreign residents to local institutions (suchas a city ward office) for translation and interpretation, and in some cases planning and coordinating
events focusing on multicultural cooperation.
Respondents note that there are groups of foreign residents who seem under-represented inconsultations. Practitioners offering public support, typically through city or prefecture-level offices,feel that undocumented residents are highly unlikely to make contact. One respondent in fact notedthat their city deletes foreign resident information once their visa expires. As such, city officials thenlose the means to track these individuals, follow up on their status, or provide any other services that
may be necessary. Others noted that trainees are generally under-represented, as are mixed children
with one Japanese parent, and single parent households.
In terms of problems encountered in dealing with foreign residents, practitioners note different setsof difficulties for government positions versus the nonprofit sector. For official city jobs, hierarchicalrigidity seems to pose a problem. Practitioners can only do their tasks as assigned. A translator, forexample, may only translate regardless of any other useful contributions they could make. Residents
sometimes ask for specific services, but they may be outside of the scope of what city workers are able
to provide based on assigned roles. This may be useful in keeping administrators from overstepping10

Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

their bounds, but can diminish problem-solving capacity. Respondents additionally criticize a lack offoreign awareness on the part of other city administrators.
For the nonprofit/NGO sector, practitioners note a pervasive lack of funding. This serves tominimize the level of services offered. As Miyazawa and Moriguchi (2015) explain, municipal grantschemes for organizations targeting foreign residents can often be quite narrow and application
processes complicated. For Nagoya, the vast majority of city funds go to the NIC, with very little
available for other organizations. While organizations with motivated staff may well exist, they areoften disparate and limited in their activities, in some cases with members having to bear financial
responsibility for organization activities themselves.
Lastly, practitioners identify a number of areas requiring attention. For example, one
recommendation is multilingual assistance for nursing care insurance and services for the disabled,neither of which is currently available in the area. Second, practitioners note that coordination
between the NGO sector and area public schools is insufficient, and there is not enough support
available for children with “complicated” family backgrounds. Third, teachers are often the primarypoint of interaction with children, but they do not have sufficient knowledge or expertise to navigate
sometimes difficult domestic situations. Fourth, local governments, rather than prefectural
government, should actively recruit and retain multicultural social workers and school social workers.
Local-level social workers may be able to provide a higher degree of support at a more consistent rate,
especially because schools in particular are already managed by municipal governments.

6. Conclusion
The POPIC project has endeavored to provide an updated explanation of the services offered toforeign residents in the Nagoya area, looking here at four aspects: foreign resident assessments, theNagoya International Center, the Aichi International Association, and practitioner assessments. We
observe that although foreign residents in the Nagoya area are generally satisfied with the level ofservices offered, there is considerable room for improvement. Table 1 below summarizes our main
findings. We note a strong overlap in general services such as consultations, and a lack of central
coordination. The city can focus on providing clear and uniform dissemination of information in
multiple languages and simplified Japanese, centralized storage of information, in particular regarding
Japanese language classes and other essential services, and a minimization of overlapping functions.
Organizations should play to their strengths, where a group like the Aichi International Association
may not need to offer the same kinds of consultations as the Nagoya International Center, but can (andshould) try to expand their multicultural social work activities.
Ultimately, more cooperation is needed between public and private organizations, both in termsof information and funding. Funding is highly centralized, with city and prefecture-sanctioned

11

Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

organizations receiving most funds. Other local nonprofit groups maintain a strong mission andconsiderable dedication to their cause, can often provide specialized support, yet suffer from a chroniclack of funds. City organizations are more constrained in their missions and what they can accomplish,
but are comparatively well funded. To improve services for foreign residents in the area going forward,these two sides should work closer together toward this common goal.
Table 1Services Provided and Challenges Faced by Each Stakeholder
Primary Services

Challenges Faced

NagoyaInternational
Center＊Multilingual information＊Multilingual consultation＊Japanese language courses＊Mental health consultation＊Interpretation (Trio-phone system)＊Little follow-through is available after
consultations＊Complicated issues that cannot be solved
by simple consultation are increasing

Aichi
International
Association＊Multilingual information＊Multilingual consultation＊Japanese language courses＊Dispatching multicultural social workers＊A lack of publicity and awareness of theorganization＊Multicultural social workers are underutilized

Practitioners＊Consultation through official city channels, ＊Hierarchical rigidity diminishes the
local nonprofits and nongovernmental
problem-solving capacity of practitioners
organizations
in official city jobs
＊In-person translation, accompanying ＊Lack of funding in nonprofit/NGO sector
foreign residents to local institutions
minimizes the level of outside services

Note: Overlapping functions of the Nagoya International Center and the Aichi International Association are included in boldface

Acknowledgements
This project was supported by grants from the Nagoya University Alumni Association (NUAL) andthe Nagoya University Graduate School of International Development Alumni Association (GSIDNUAL). The authors would like to express their gratitude to the staffs at the Nagoya International
Center, the Aichi International Association, and all of the practitioners offering their time to participate
in the interviews.

Notes
1 Participants included Japanese graduate students, as well as a diverse group of foreign students and scholars.
2 This survey was conducted by sending mail to foreign residents and holding additional follow-up visits. There
were 1708 responses. Topics cover issues such as demographics, child care, health care, work, and housing.
3 POPIC Surveys were administered in-person, with 86 surveys completed.
4 Nagoya city additionally implemented a second foreign resident survey in 2015, although results from this survey

12Forum of International Development Studies. 48―n1 (Mar. 2018)

were not available at the time of POPIC survey.

References
Aichi International Association (AIA). 2016a. “Information Counter” http://www2.aia.pref.aichi.jp/tope/indexe.html(accessed October 1, 2016)―. 2016b. “Free Legal Consultation for Foreigners” http://www2.aia.pref.aichi.jp/tope/indexe.html (accessed
October 1, 2016)―. 2016c. “Consultation Examples”. http://www2.aia.pref.aichi.jp/tope/indexe.html (accessed October 1, 2016)
Brody, Betsy. 2002. Opening the Door: Immigration, Ethnicity, and Globalization in Japan. New York: Routledge.
Ishikawa, Kumiko. 2012. Tabunka Sō sharu Wā ku no Riron to Jissen: Gaikokujin Shiensha ni Motomerareru Skiru to
Yakuwari [Multicultural Social Work Theory and Practice: the Role and Skill of Foreign Support Workers]. Akashi
Shoten.
Machimura, Takashi. 2000. Local settlement patterns of foreign workers in Greater Tokyo: growing diversity and its
consequences. In: Mike Douglass and Glenda S. Roberts eds. Japan and Global Migration: Foreign Workers and theAdvent of a Multicultural Society, 176―195. New York: Routledge.
Miyazawa, Hitoshi and Fumi Moriguchi. 2015. Education Support for Foreign Children: Citizen Action Groups inHamamatsu City. In: Yoshitaka Ishikawa ed. International Migrants in Japan: Contributions in an Era of Population
Decline, 171―194. Melbourne: Trans Pacific Press.
Nagoya City. 2011. Heisei 22 nen Nagoya-shi Gaikokujin Shimin Ankēto Chōsa Kekka Hōkusho [Nagoya City 2010
Foreign Resident Survey Results]. http://www.city.nagoya.jp/kankobunkakoryu/cmsfiles/contents/0000022/22868/
hokokusyo.pdf (accessed April 5, 2016)―. 2014. Heisei 25 nendo Dai 1 kai Shisei Ankēto (Chōsa Kekka) [The Result of the First Municipal Survey in2013].
http://www.city.nagoya.jp/shiminkeizai/cmsfiles/contents/0000052/52454/25―1―2kekka.pdf (accessed April 5, 2016)―. 2017. Heisei 28 nen Nagoya-shi Gaikokujin Jyumin Tokei [Statistics on Foreign Residents in Nagoya Cityin 2016] http://www.city.nagoya.jp/kankobunkakoryu/cmsfiles/contents/0000080/80856/H28juumintoukei(gaiyou).
pdf (accessed September 1, 2017)
Nagoya International Center (NIC). 2016a. “Information Services”
http://www.nic-nagoya.or.jp/en/e/our-services/information-services (accessed October 1, 2016)―. 2016b. “Free Consultation Services for Foreign Residents”.
http://www.nic-nagoya.or.jp/en/e/our-services/free-consultation-services-for-foreign-residents (accessed October 1,
2016)―. 2016c. “Three-way Call Civic Interpreter Service”.
http://www.nic-nagoya.or.jp/en/e/archives/3703 (accessed October 1, 2016)
Sugisawa, Tsuneko. 2011. Tagengo, Tabunkashakai ni okeru Senmonjinzai no Yōsei [Fostering Specialist Human
Resources for a Multilingual, Multicultural Society]. In Atsushi Kondo ed. Tabunkakyō sei Seisaku he no Apurō chi [AnApproach to Multicultural Co-Existence Policy], 193―208. Akashi Shoten.
Tegtmeyer Pak, Katherine. 2000. Living in Harmony: Prospects for Cooperative Local Responses to Foreign
Migrants. In: Sheila A. Smith, ed. Local Voices, National Issues: the Impact of Local Initiative in Japanese Policymaking, 51―74. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Yamanaka, Keiko. 2006. Immigrant Incorporation and Women’s Community Activities in Japan: Local NGOs
and Public Education for Immigrant Children. In: Takeyuki Tsuda ed. Local Citizenship in Recent Countries of
Immigration: Japan in Comparative Perspective, 97―119. Lanham: Lexington Books.

13