Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
Table 3-2 Unit Root Tests

Country Variable	Phillip-Perrot Test	Augmented Dicky-Fuller Test
PP	Prob	Adj R2	ADF	Prob	Adj R2
Bangladesh
D(logGDPP)	-4.755	0.0001	0.423	-8.938	0.0000	0.805
D(INVSR)	-6.560	0.0000	0.586	-5.949	0.0000	0.737
D(MR)	-8.537	0.0000	0.725	-4.318	0.0003	0.708
D(GAIKA)	-7.276	0.0000	0.662	-4.875	0.0001	0.722
Brazil
D(logGDPP)	-3.631	0.0011	0.301	-2.735	0.0118	0.298
D(INVSR)	-3.316	0.0022	0.263	-2.994	0.0065	0.242
D(MR)	-3.964	0.0005	0.341	-2.614	0.0155	0.343
D(GAIKA)	-5.277	0.0000	0.489	-5.082	0.0000	0.546
China
D(logGDPP)	-3.267	0.0027	0.255	-2.784	0.0105	0.243
D(INVSR)	-5.179	0.0000	0.478	-3.703	0.0012	0.469
D(MR)	-4.183	0.0003	0.367	-4.127	0.0004	0.395
D(GAIKA)	-3.884	0.0007	0.327	-3.242	0.0036	0.304
India
D(logGDPP)	-6.690	0.0000	0.586	-4.591	0.0001	0.602
D(INVSR)	-12.673	0.0000	0.758	-6.268	0.0000	0.779
D(MR)	-4.924	0.0000	0.452	-2.650	0.0143	0.405
D(GAIKA)	-5.316	0.0000	0.495	-3.642	0.0014	0.475
Indonesia
D(logGDPP)	-3.864	0.0007	0.330	-2.238	0.0350	0.314
D(INVSR)	-4.100	0.0004	0.354	-2.360**	0.0291**	0.397
D(MR)	-3.263	0.0032	0.267	-3.028	0.0060	0.260
D(GAIKA)	-4.258	0.0003	0.379	-3.354	0.0028	0.398
Malaysia
D(logGDPP)	-4.235	0.0003	0.373	-3.108	0.0050	0.347
D(INVSR)	-4.566	0.0001	0.411	-2.360*	0.0280*	0.439
D(MR)	-4.090	0.0004	0.353	-3.413	0.0024	0.351
D(GAIKA)	-5.085	0.0000	0.469	-5.317	0.0000	0.547
Pakistan
D(logGDPP)	-4.309	0.0002	0.392	-3.597	0.0015	0.523
D(INVSR)	-6.883	0.0000	0.633	-3.670	0.0013	0.637
D(MR)	-4.079	0.0004	0.354	-5.956	0.0000	0.612
D(GAIKA)	-6.328	0.0000	0.586	-5.775	0.0000	0.607
Peru
D(logGDPP)	-3.385	0.0019	0.270	-3.527	0.0015	0.284
D(INVSR)	-3.358	0.0015	0.285	-4.231	0.0003	0.375
D(MR)	-3.528	0.0016	0.289	-3.083	0.0052	0.275
D(GAIKA)	-7.209	0.0000	0.649	-4.385	0.0002	0.643
Thailand
D(logGDPP)	-2.894	0.0069	0.200	-3.115	0.0049	0.249
D(INVSR)	-4.313	0.0002	0.388	-3.827	0.0009	0.406
D(MR)	-5.143	0.0000	0.475	-3.814	0.0009	0.430
D(GAIKA)	-5.718	0.0000	0.532	-4.918	0.0001	0.582

Note: *lags:2, **lags:3
Table 3-3 Granger Causality Tests

Country	Null Hypothesis:	Lags	Obs	F-Stat	Prob
Bangladesh	D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(GAIKA)	1	27	7.36	0.0121
D(GAIKA) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	1	27	3.11	0.0905
D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(GAIKA)	1	27	4.58	0.0428
D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(logGDPP)	2	26	18.19	0.0000
D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	2	26	2.94	0.0750
D(MR) does not Granger Cause D(GAIKA)	2	26	3.04	0.0693
Brazil	D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	1	28	3.97	0.0573
China	D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(logGDPP)	1	28	4.94	0.0355
D(GAIKA) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	1	28	4.52	0.0436
D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	2	27	7.71	0.0029
India	D(MR) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	2	27	4.07	0.0314
Indonesia	D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	1	28	6.45	0.0177
D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	1	28	50.17	0.0000
D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(GAIKA)	1	28	8.26	0.0082
D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	1	28	20.48	0.0001
D(MR) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	2	27	3.45	0.0497
D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(GAIKA)	2	27	5.57	0.0110
D(GAIKA) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	2	27	2.74	0.0865
D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(logGDPP)	3	26	3.01	0.0557
Malaysia	D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	2	27	4.11	0.0303
D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(logGDPP)	3	26	2.98	0.0575
D(MR) does not Granger Cause D(logGDPP)	3	26	3.98	0.0234
Pakistan	D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	1	28	4.81	0.0379
D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	2	27	4.27	0.0272
D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(logGDPP)	3	26	3.23	0.0454
Peru	D(INVSR) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	1	28	4.93	0.0357
D(GAIKA) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	3	26	2.52	0.0888
Thailand	D(GAIKA) does not Granger Cause D(INVSR)	1	28	5.52	0.0270
D(GAIKA) does not Granger Cause D(logGDPP)	2	27	8.25	0.0021
D(logGDPP) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	3	26	2.91	0.0610
D(GAIKA) does not Granger Cause D(MR)	3	26	5.02	0.0099
Figure 3-4 Response of per capita GDP to one S. D. Impulses $ \pm $ 2 S. E.
Table 3-5 Variance Decomposition of per capita GDP Growth

Bangladesh

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.017	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.024	67.80	31.73	0.20	0.27
3	0.025	62.52	36.55	0.25	0.69
4	0.025	61.65	37.11	0.29	0.96
5	0.025	61.35	36.95	0.74	0.96
6	0.025	61.26	36.88	0.90	0.96
7	0.025	61.24	36.88	0.92	0.96
8	0.025	61.23	36.88	0.92	0.96
9	0.025	61.23	36.89	0.92	0.96
10	0.025	61.23	36.89	0.92	0.96

Brazil

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.043	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.046	97.02	0.13	0.03	2.82
3	0.049	95.91	0.18	0.82	3.09
4	0.050	94.72	0.20	0.87	4.21
5	0.050	92.70	0.32	2.87	4.11
6	0.050	92.07	0.33	3.30	4.31
7	0.050	92.04	0.36	3.29	4.30
8	0.050	91.97	0.36	3.29	4.37
9	0.050	91.91	0.37	3.35	4.37
10	0.050	91.87	0.37	3.38	4.38

China

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.033	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.039	91.54	8.14	0.09	0.23
3	0.041	87.02	7.82	2.67	2.49
4	0.042	85.88	8.38	3.02	2.73
5	0.042	85.77	8.30	2.98	2.95
6	0.042	85.93	8.20	2.91	2.95
7	0.043	85.74	8.34	2.94	2.98
8	0.043	85.58	8.37	3.01	3.04
9	0.043	85.57	8.37	3.01	3.04
10	0.043	85.58	8.36	3.01	3.05

Cholesky Ordering: D(LOGGDPP) D(INVSR) D(MR) D(GAIKA)
India

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.033	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.034	97.85	0.03	0.28	1.85
3	0.036	83.74	2.91	0.34	13.00
4	0.036	83.60	2.98	0.47	12.95
5	0.036	83.48	2.97	0.58	12.97
6	0.036	83.35	3.03	0.58	13.04
7	0.036	83.32	3.05	0.58	13.05
8	0.036	83.31	3.05	0.59	13.05
9	0.036	83.31	3.05	0.59	13.05
10	0.036	83.30	3.05	0.59	13.05

Indonesia

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.040	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.048	79.80	2.17	16.37	1.66
3	0.058	72.01	13.80	13.08	1.11
4	0.059	70.00	13.37	14.12	2.51
5	0.061	67.89	13.67	15.95	2.49
6	0.063	69.54	12.88	15.16	2.42
7	0.064	69.30	12.84	15.12	2.74
8	0.067	70.03	13.34	14.08	2.55
9	0.067	69.80	13.29	14.35	2.55
10	0.069	69.48	13.58	14.50	2.45

Malaysia

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.037	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.044	82.36	4.09	3.32	10.23
3	0.048	71.14	9.49	10.67	8.70
4	0.048	70.13	9.34	11.14	9.38
5	0.049	67.00	9.16	14.94	8.90
6	0.050	66.28	9.05	15.84	8.84
7	0.050	66.04	9.08	16.04	8.84
8	0.050	65.71	9.01	16.44	8.83
9	0.050	65.70	9.03	16.44	8.83
10	0.050	65.65	9.02	16.50	8.84

Cholesky Ordering: D(LOGGDPP) D(INVSR) D(MR) D(GAIKA)
Pakistan

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.018	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.019	92.30	5.52	1.27	0.91
3	0.020	91.82	6.09	1.23	0.86
4	0.023	66.90	29.33	1.40	2.37
5	0.025	62.51	30.05	4.78	2.66
6	0.026	57.77	35.23	4.42	2.58
7	0.027	56.88	34.89	5.13	3.10
8	0.027	58.04	33.92	5.00	3.04
9	0.027	56.75	34.92	5.25	3.07
10	0.027	56.50	35.15	5.28	3.06

Peru

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.055	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.063	80.77	0.01	10.47	8.75
3	0.069	70.06	7.67	9.32	12.95
4	0.074	61.77	12.22	8.33	17.69
5	0.076	60.33	11.72	10.49	17.46
6	0.079	54.96	16.72	12.40	15.92
7	0.081	52.63	19.63	11.95	15.80
8	0.083	51.27	20.78	11.78	16.17
9	0.084	51.50	20.67	11.86	15.97
10	0.084	51.32	20.73	11.97	15.98

Thailand

Period	S.E.	D( $ \log $ GDPP)	D(INVSR)	D(MR)	D(GAIKA)
1	0.033	100.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	0.039	91.54	8.14	0.09	0.23
3	0.041	87.02	7.82	2.67	2.49
4	0.042	85.88	8.38	3.02	2.73
5	0.042	85.77	8.30	2.98	2.95
6	0.042	85.93	8.20	2.91	2.95
7	0.043	85.74	8.34	2.94	2.98
8	0.043	85.58	8.37	3.01	3.04
9	0.043	85.57	8.37	3.01	3.04
10	0.043	85.58	8.36	3.01	3.05

Cholesky Ordering: D(LOGGDPP) D(INVSR) D(MR) D(GAIKA)
Barro, R.J. (1991), “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), 407-433

Burnside, C. and D. Dollar (1997), “Aid, Policies and Growth”, Policy Research Working Paper 1777, World Bank

Chenery, H.B. and A. Strout (1966), “Foreign Assistance and Economic Development”, American Economic Review, 56, 679-733

Eaton, J. (1989), “Foreign Public Capital Flows” in H. Chenery and T. Srinivasan ed., Handbook of Development Economics, 2(25), 1305-1386

Eviews User’s Guide (1994), Quantitative Micro Software, 2 $ ^{nd} $ edition

Findlay, R. (1973), International Trade and Development Theory, Columbia Univ. Press

Fukao, K. (2000), “International Capital Flow—Does Capital flow from Rich Countries to Poor Countries?”, Chapter 5 in S. Fukuda, A. Horiuchi and K. Iwata (eds) Macro Keizai to Kinyu System (Macroeconomics and the Financial System), University of Tokyo Press

Gujarati, D.N. (1995), Basic Econometrics, McGraw-Hill, 3 $ ^{rd} $ edition

Imaoka, H. (1998), “Enjo no Hyoka to Koka-teki Jisshi (Evaluation and Effective Practices of Development Assistance)”, Keizai Kyoryoku Series 184, Institute of Developing Economics

Inaba, Y. (2002), “Social Capital o meguru Ichi Kosatsu (Thoughts on the Social Capital)”, ECO-FORUM 21(2), 16-23

Ishii, N. (2001), “Kaihatsu Senryaku no Hensen to Enjyo no Yukosei (Development Strategies and Effectiveness of Aid)”, Financial Review, 54, 68-103, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance

Jin Xide (2002), Tettei Kensho! Nihon-gata ODA (Thorough Investigation into Japan's ODA), Sanwa Shoseki

Jones, R.W. (1985), “Income Effects and Paradoxes in the Theory of International Trade”, Economic Journal, 95, 330-344

Kawasaki, K. (2002), “The Impact of Japanese Economic Cooperation on Asian Economic Development”, ESRI Discussio Paper Series 16

King, R.G. and R. Levine (1993), “Finance, Entrepreneurship and Growth: Theory and Evidence”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 32(3), 513-542

Knack, S. and P. Keefer (1997), “Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? Cross-country Investigation”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(4), 251-1288
Kohama, H. (1998), ODA no Keizai-gaku (Economics of ODA), 2 $ ^{nd} $ edition, Nihon Hyoron-sha

Kokumin Keizai Research Institute (2001), Kaihatsu Tojyokoku no Keizai Hatten to Yen-shakkan no Yakuwari (Effects of the Yen-loans on Developing Economies), consigned research by Economic Planning Agency

Komori, Y. (2002), ODA Saiko (Rethinking ODA), PHP Shinsho 232

Lucas, R.E. (1990), “Why Doesn’t Capital Flow from Rich to Poor Countries”, American Economic Review, 80, 92-96

Matsuura, K. and C. McKenzie (2001), Eviews ni-yoru Keiryo Keizai Bunseki (Econometric Analysis by Eviews), Toyo Keizai Shimpo-sha

McKinnon, R.E. (1964), “Foreign Exchange Constraints in Economic Development and Efficient Aid Allocation”, Economic Journal, 74, 388-409

Ohlin, B. (1929), “Transfer Differences, Real and Imagined, and Mr. Keynes: Views on the Transfer Problem”, Economic Journal, 39, 179-182

Putnum, R.D. (1993), Making Democracy Work, Princeton University Press

Radelet, S., J. Sachs and J. Lee (1997), “Economic Growth in Asia”, Emerging Asia: Changes and Challenges, Asian Development Bank

Romer, P.M. (1990), “Endogenous Technological Change”, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 71-102

Shioji, E. (2001), “Cross-country data niyoru Keizai Seicho no Bunseki (Cross-country Data Analysis of Economic Growth)”, Financial Review 54, 42-67, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Finance

Wago, H. and K. Ban (1987), TSP ni-yoru Keizai Data no Bunseki (Economic Data Analysis by TSP), University of Tokyo Press, 2 $ ^{nd} $ edition

Williamson, J. (1983), The Open Economy and the World Economy, Basic Books, Japanese translation by M. Suda et al (1990), Sekai Keizai to Macro Riron, Taga Shuppan

World Bank (1998), Assessing Aid—What Works, What Doesn’t and Why?

Yamashita, M. (2003), “Nihon no ODA Seisaku no Genjyo to Kadai (Overview of Japan’s ODA Policies)”, ESRI ResearchReport 3, Economic and Social Research Institute, Cabinet Office

Yamashita, N. (2001), “The Export-led Growth Hypothesis in East Asia: Evidence from Cross-country & Time-series Data”, Master’s dissertation, Fukuoka University

Yamamoto, T. (1994), Keizai no Jikeiretsu Bunseki (Time-series Data Analysis on Economics), 4 $ ^{th} $ edition, Sobun-sha

Yano, M. and J.B. Nugent (June 1999), “Aid, Nontraded Goods, and the Transfer Paradox in Small Countries”, American Economic Review, 431-449
### Chapter 1. Foreign Nationals Entering and Departing from Japan

## Section 1 ☐ Changes in the Number of Foreign Nationals Entering and Departing from Japan

## 1 Foreign Nationals Entering Japan

## (1) The Number of Foreign Nationals Entering Japan

The number of foreign nationals entering Japan was only about 18,000 in 1950 when the statistics relating to immigration control first began to be recorded. As a result of the enforcement of the “Peace Treaty with Japan” (Treaty No. 5 of 1952) on April 28, 1952, Japan recovered complete sovereignty and acquired the authority to decide whether or not to grant permission for entry based on the Immigration Control Order. Following which the number of foreign nationals entering Japan began to experience an almost consistent upward trend partly as a result of cheaper and more convenient flights achieved through improvements in international transportation such as through the use of larger jumbo jets, exceeding 1 million in 1978, 2 million in 1984, 3 million in 1990, 4 million in 1996, 5 million in 2000, and 9 million in 2007.

The number of foreign nationals entering Japan in 2012 was 9,172,146, an increase of 2,036,739 (28.5%) from 7,135,407 in 2011.

Of the 9,172,146 foreign nationals entering Japan in 2012, the number of foreign nationals “newly entering” was 7,549,998, an increase of 2,101,979 (38.6%) from 5,448,019 in 2011, while the number of foreign nationals “re-entering” was 1,622,148, a decrease of 65,240 (3.9%) from 1,687,388 in 2011.

Moreover, the rates of increase in the number of foreign nationals entering Japan and the number of foreign nationals newly entering Japan hit a record high. These substantial increases may have been caused by an increase in the supply of airplane seats triggered by new flight services on low-cost carriers (LCCs) coupled with lower air fares, which encouraged a rebound in the number of tourists that had previously seen a decline owing to the occurrence of the Great East Japan Earthquake. (Chart 7)
Chart 7: Changes in the number of foreign nationals entering Japan

$ ^{*} $ There are no separate categories for arrivals for 1955 and 1960.

## (2) The Number of Foreign Nationals Entering Japan by Nationality/Region

The statistics for the number of foreign nationals entering Japan in 2012 by nationality/region show that the largest number of foreign nationals came from the Republic of Korea (R.O. Korea). The number of R.O. Korean nationals who entered Japan was 2,315,238, accounting for 25.2% of the total number of foreign nationals coming to Japan. R.O. Korea was followed by China (1,626,265 (17.7%)), Taiwan (1,503,183 (16.4%)), the U.S. (747,809 (8.2%)), and China (Hong Kong) (462,920 (5.0%)) (*). More than half of the foreign nationals entering Japan came from Japan's three neighboring countries (regions): R.O. Korea, China and Taiwan. Their total, standing at 59.4%, accounted for more than half of the total number of foreign nationals who entered Japan in 2012. The top five countries (regions) accounted for 72.6% of the total. Among them, R.O. Korea surpassed the U.S. in 1988 to become the top country and has maintained its position since then. Moreover, overseas travel was de-regulated, and in March 2006, visa exemption with no time limit was introduced for R.O. Korea nationals whose purpose for visiting Japan was “Temporary Visitor”. This is one of various measures that were taken to increase the exchange of persons between the two countries, and is considered to have contributed to the increase in R.O. Korean visitors. The number of visitors from China has been increasing year after year owing to the fact that sightseeing trips to Japan have become relatively easy due to the easing of regulations on visa issuance, and China has been in second place for four consecutive years. (Chart 8)
Chart 8: Changes in the number of foreign nationals entering Japan by major nationality/region

According to a comparison of the number of foreign nationals entering Japan in 2011 and 2012 by nationality/region of the top five countries/regions, the number of visitors from R.O. Korea increased by 395,362 (20.6%), followed by China, which increased by 293,565 (22.0%), Taiwan, which increased by 464,249 (44.7%), the U.S., which increased by 148,303 (24.7%), and China (Hong Kong), which increased by 113,182 (32.4%).
## (3) The Number of Foreign Nationals Entering Japan by Gender and Age

Slightly more foreign men came to Japan than women. The numbers of foreign men and women entering Japan in 2012 were 4,732,045 and 4,440,101, respectively. The percentages of men and women were 51.6% and 48.4%, respectively.

According to statistics by age in 2012, foreign nationals in their thirties represented the largest age group, accounting for 24.6% of the total number of foreign nationals who entered Japan in 2012. The ratio of men was higher in the thirties and over age groups, while the ratio of women was higher in the twenties and under age groups. (Chart 9)

Chart 9: Number of foreign nationals entering Japan by gender and age (2012)

## (4) The Number of Foreign Nationals Entering Japan by Purpose of Entry (Status of Residence)

The number of foreign nationals newly entering Japan in 2012 was 7,549,998. Looking at this figure by purpose of entry (status of residence), the most common status of residence was “Temporary Visitor” standing at 7,246,072 and accounting for 96.0% of the total number of foreign nationals newly entering Japan, followed by “Technical Intern Training (1)-(b)” at 62,039 (0.8%), “Student” at 57,579 (0.8%), and “Entertainer” at 34,969 (0.5%). (Table 2)
### A. "Temporary Visitors"

Looking more closely at the number of foreign nationals who newly entered Japan with the status of residence of “Temporary Visitor” in 2012, the number of foreign nationals for sightseeing purposes was 5,221,032, accounting for 69.2% of the total number of foreign nationals newly entering Japan, followed by foreign nationals visiting for business-related purposes standing at 1,344,227 (17.8%). Since the trend of tourists who are temporary visitors is likely to be affected by miscellaneous factors occurring in Japan, such as the holding of special events, fluctuations in the exchange rate and the implementation of various measures to attract tourists, it is consequently assumed that changes in the number of foreign nationals newly entering Japan, of which temporary visitors make up the majority, reflect the social situation in Japan and domestic and overseas trends at that time.

Foreign nationals staying in Japan with the status of residence of “Temporary Visitor” cannot, in principle, change their status to another status of residence as they are not permitted to engage in employment activities, and moreover, were allowed to enter through relatively simple procedures (Articles 19 and 20 of the Immigration Control Act).

According to the statistics on newly entering foreign nationals for the purpose of sightseeing by nationality/region, R.O. Korea occupied the largest number at 1,427,902, accounting for 27.3% of the total number of foreign nationals entering Japan for the purpose of sightseeing. R.O. Korea was followed by Taiwan (1,288,035, accounting for 24.7% of the total), China (644,213, accounting for 12.3%) and China (Hong Kong) (423,481, accounting for 8.1%). As R.O. Korean nationals, Taiwanese nationals, and Chinese (People's Republic of China) nationals account for over 60% of the overall number of sightseeing visitors to Japan, it is expected that measures to attract tourists from these countries and regions will be implemented actively in the future as well. (Chart10, 11)
Chart 10: Changes in the number of foreign nationals newly entering with the status of residence of “Temporary Visitor” by purpose of entry

Chart 11: Number of foreign nationals newly entering for the purpose of sightseeing by nationality/region (2012)
### B. Foreign Nationals Entering Japan for the Purpose of Employment in Professional or Technical Fields

The number of newly entering foreign nationals with a status of residence for employment in professional or technical fields (excluding the status of residence of “Diplomat”, “Official” and “Technical Intern Training” in Appended Tables I(1) and I(2) of the Immigration Control Act) in 2012 was 63,461, an increase of 11,738 (22.7%) from 2011. (Chart 12)

Chart 12: Changes in the number of foreign nationals newly entering by status of residence for employment in professional or technical fields

(*) Excluding the status of residence of “Diplomat”, “Official”, “Technical Intern Training” and “Designated Activities” from Table II-1, I-2 and I-5 in the Appended Table to the “Immigration Control Act”

The number of newly entering foreign nationals with a status of residence for employment in professional or technical fields in Japan accounted for 0.8% of the total number of newly entering foreign nationals in 2012.

The characteristic categories of foreign nationals entering Japan for the purpose of employment are as follows.
### c. “Entertainer” (Data Section 2, Statistics (1) 5-1)

Although the number of newly entering foreign nationals with the status of residence of “Entertainer” had been steadily increasing since 2001, it decreased after 2005. However, in 2012, the number increased again. In 2012, it increased to 34,969, an increase of 8,857 (33.9%) from 2011, representing the largest ratio of total foreign nationals with a status of residence for employment in a professional or technical field. It was the first time that the number had increased from the previous year following the implementation of stricter landing and residence examinations through a review of the entry permission criteria (ministerial ordinance) for the status of residence of “Entertainer” in 2006.

According to the statistics by nationality/region, the largest number of foreign nationals newly entering with the status of residence of “Entertainer” came from R.O. Korea (6,528, 18.7%), followed by the U.S. (6,514, 18.6%), the U.K. (2,916, 8.3%), the Philippines (1,984, 5.7%), and Russia (1,982, 5.7%) in 2012. For R.O. Korea, the number of foreign nationals newly entering had increased by 3,349 (105.3%) from 2011.

### C. “Student” (Data Section 2, Statistics (1) 9-1)

The number of newly entering foreign nationals with the status of residence of “Student” had increased by 7,643 (15.3%) from a year earlier to 57,579 in 2012, consisting mostly of those from Asia (83.4%).

According to statistics by nationality/region, those from China accounted for 46.1% of the total, standing at 26,554, followed by R.O. Korea (5,855, or 10.2%). The number of Chinese students had increased by 2,696 (11.3%), while that of R.O. Korean students had decreased by 894 (13.2%). (Chart13)

Chart 13: Changes in the number of foreign nationals newly entering with the status of residence of “Student” by major nationality/region

$ ^{*} $ Because the status of residence “Pre-college Student” was consolidated into “Student” on July 1, 2010, the figures in the “Student” section from 2008 to 2010 represent the sum of “College Student” and “Pre-college Student.”