Vagrant voices, red sun

Notes on Filipino migrant support organizations and Filipino migrants in Japan

Abstract
Filipinos comprise the fourth largest group of foreigners in Japan (Statistics
Bureau 2006) and the figure does not even take into account those ho are
undocumented! Japan is not reall" a countr" knon for its friendliness to foreigners
#ut the presence of Filipinos$ according to some vies$ have not onl" hastened this
cloistered countr"%s internationalization #ut transformed its civil societ"!
But e&actl" hat support or interventions do these organizations provide' (re
Filipino migrant organizations in Japan support organizations or advocac"
organizations' )o these interventions actuall" fulfill the needs of their supposed
stakeholders' *o do Filipino migrants look at support organizations' (nd hat
conclusions can e dra from these activities ith respect to civil societ" as a hole$
as ell as their potential to influence migration policies'
+his paper dras from an ongoing stud" emplo"ing ,ualitative and
,uantitative approaches to determine hether Filipino support organizations actuall"
pla" a role in Japan%s migration polic" d"namics! -t argues that the reason h"
Filipino support organizations find it difficult to shift into advocac" is #ecause
Filipino migrants in Japan are themselves indifferent stakeholders ho cannot serve
as a resource for collective action$ and prefer provisional support services more than
polic" change!
.e"ords/
Filipino migration$ Filipino migrant support organizations$ social movements$
Japanese civil societ"$ stakeholder anal"sis$ agenda setting$ Filipino migrant surve"!
Vagrant voices, red sun
Notes on Filipino migrant support organizations and Filipino migrants in Japan
B" 0ogelio (licor 1! 2anao
(re Filipino migrant organizations in Japan support organizations or polic"
advocates' *o do Filipino migrants$ their stakeholders$ see them' )o the" actuall"
fulfill the needs of their supposed stakeholders' (nd hat conclusions can e dra
from these activities ith respect to civil societ" as a hole$ as ell as their potential
to influence migration policies'
1iterature a#ound shoing evidence of a sudden and groing d"namism in
Japanese civil societ" in recent "ears (2harr 20034 0eimann 20504 6inken and
)iepstraten 2050)! But if there is groing d"namism in Japanese civil societ"$
organizations should have #ecome more active and loud in advocating issues$
especiall" those that have clear polic" implications such as the reform of Japan%s
immigration policies! (s for Filipinos$ on the other hand$ ith their propensit" to
remove presidents #" people poer the" should #e among the most passionate and
outspoken of Japan%s migrant groups hen it comes to protecting their rights! +his$
hoever$ is not the case as this paper shos!
+his paper ill address the a#ove ,uestions using a semi7structured
intervies$ descriptive content anal"sis and surve"s! +he stated goals and services of
the Solidarit" Netork ith 8igrants Japan or -9uuren mem#er organizations (the
largest migrant support netork in Japan)$ and several other Filipino support
5
organizations ere e&amined through literature revie and descriptive content
anal"sis! Structured intervies ere then conducted ith .apatiran (hich is allied
ith -9uuren and listed in the director" of :ommission on Filipino ;verseas and
hose primar" service is to provide counseling services to distressed migrants)! Semi7
structured intervies ere also conducted ith .apatiran volunteers and clients!
Ne&t$ - conducted unstructured intervies and a surve" among Filipino
migrants in +ok"o in ;cto#er 2050 in hich respondents ere asked$ among other
things$ hether the" have availed of services offered #" support organizations$ ho
the services match their needs$ and their idea of hat support organizations should #e!
+he surve" is meant to gauge ho Filipino migrants as stakeholders vie the
interventions #" migrant support organizations as service providers$ and hether
these interventions actuall" correspond to hat the" claim the" need! +he surve" is
also intended to ascertain hether Filipino migrants themselves ant support
organizations to advocate policies in their #ehalf or are content ith them as support
service providers!
- argue that Filipino support organizations find it difficult to shift into
advocac" #ecause the Filipino migrants in Japan themselves are indifferent
stakeholders ho (a) cannot serve as a resource for collective action4 and (#) cannot
identif" ith the issue of immigration polic" reform for the" prefer the immediate #ut
provisional support programs than polic" change!
+he results of m" surve" among Filipino migrants in +ok"o suggest that
Filipino migrants themselves do not regard support organizations as an"thing #e"ond
service providers! -n fact$ Filipinos themselves do not consider changing Japanese
immigration policies as important as improving the provision of ever"da" support
services that the" need to lead ordinar" lives in a foreign countr"! 8ost e&pect
nothing more than migrant support organizations to provide legal$ material and
financial support! Neither do the" e&pect these organizations to advocate for reforms
in immigration policies$ or amendments in las that ill #enefit Filipinos in Japan!
Filipino migrants themselves do not take immerse themselves in the repertoire
of migration advocac" in Japan and tend more to #e passive #"standers! <iven Japan%s
unelcoming immigration s"stem here the prospect of acceptance and integration is
almost nil$ Filipinos resign themselves to #eing transients and temporar" so9ourners$
and as such$ have little incentive to in the struggle for long term concrete reforms in
migration polic" as a social pro#lems game!
Civil society and migrants in Japan: A short review of literature
Japan%s civil societ" and the conte&t of its social movements have long
puzzled scholars and researchers! =hile there has #een a recent rise of activism in
Japan$ civil societ" is idel" regarded to #e passive$ if not underdeveloped (0eimann
2050)!
0o#ert 2ekkanen (2006) #elieves that the state directl" and indirectl"
structures incentives for the formation and development of civil societ" organizations!
(ccordingl"$ this e&plains h" Japan%s civil societ" conte&t is peculiar in the
international communit" ith respect to other developed countries$ especiall" hen
considering the regulator" frameork civil societ" organizations face! 2ekkanen
points at Japan%s political institutional structure and the incentives (or disincentives)
to e&plain h" groups form and operate in civil societ"! *ere$ political institutional
structures refer to the regulator" frameork (e!g!$ las$ regulations$ as ell as
provision of resources such as direct state funding$ among others)$ the political
opportunit" structure (e!g!$ #ureaucratic dominance)$ and other direct influences (e!g!$
2
conflict management strategies$ postal regulations providing discounts to #ulk mails
#" nonprofit organizations)!
Japan has pro#a#l" >the most severe regulator" environments in the developed
orld? here pu#lic interest legal person groups can ac,uire 9uridical personalit"
onl" through the e&plicit permission of designated #ureaucratic authorit"$ and not
ithout the latter%s constant guidance and supervision (56)! -n this conte&t$ groups
hose o#9ectives run against those of the permitting ministr" ould likel" not gain
approval! -n fact$ man" nonprofit organizations (N2;) cannot ,ualif" as legal persons
and this poses pro#lems that echo to the ver" survival of these organizations!
8oreover$ hile it is hard enough for independent groups to gro$ it is likeise hard
for groups to remain independent! +his is #ecause the agencies responsi#le for
granting legal status e&ercises significant monitoring (reporting and investigating) and
sanctioning (punishments$ revocation of status) poer over groups! Furthermore$ the
state is not as generous in terms of concomitant ta& incentives and financial support
compared ith other industrialized countries!
-n other ords$ groups have faced restrictive regulations and limited financial
flos hich someho e&plain h" civil societ" has found it difficult to gro large
and remain independent! +his pattern tend to promote one t"pe of group hile
hindered another@hat 2ekkanen refers to as Japan%s dual civil societ"! (ccordingl"$
small local groups such as neigh#orhood associations have flourished ith support
from the state hile large independent professionalized groups have faced harsh legal
environments! Japan%s civil societ"$ sa"s 2ekkanen$ is one in hich there are mem#ers
#ut no advocates! =hile small local groups are numerous$ help #uild social capital$
improve the deliver" of social services #" local governments$ the" lack professionals
that institutionalize movements$ ork toard influencing polic" outcomes$ and
eventuall" shape the political landscape! Needless to sa"$ Japan%s political institution
have created a civil societ" that has difficult" finding a voice #ecause of the scarcit"
of professional advocates instrumental in producing independent research and
influencing polic" discourse! But then again$ it could also #e that an underl"ing
reason h" civil societ" is relativel" eak lies in ho politicians and #ureaucrats
look at it as a non7official participant in the polic" process! 1ack of active advocac"$
especiall" those directed to and involving certain stakeholders$ ma" also offer an
e&planation #ut 2ekkanen never looked into!
0eimann (2050)$ in his on stud" of Japanese N<;s$ sa"s Japan provides a
poor political environment for N<; activism for most of the post7ar period!
)omestic political structures$ according to 0eimann$ are instrumental in the groth of
N<;s and Japan has not #een ver" active in the promotion of the nonprofit sector!
(nd #ecause the state has not offered a nurturing venue for social movements$
international political structure has #ecome necessar" to stimulate activism from
a#ove (0eimann%s e&planation to the recent rise of civil societ" in Japan)! 0eimann$
hoever$ is ,uick to point out that hile glo#al governance and promotion of N<;s
#" international governmental organizations and poerful states have #een e&tremel"
important in the spread of domestic N<;s$ the" are not the onl" reasons! :ertainl"$
Japan itself has adopted concrete changes (e!g! the passage of the N2; la in 5AAB)
#ut 0eimann #elieves Japan%s civil societ" is still in its infanc" and it ma" pro#a#l"
take "ears #efore it can appro&imate the levels of engagement found in such countries
as the CS$ C.$ :anada and the Netherlands!
Studies such as those #" +su9inaka and his colleagues (200B) tried to delve
more deepl" into Japanese civil societ" to understand and e&plain its structure using
data from the Japanese -nterest <roup Surve"! +su9inaka et al! sought to reveal ho
3
man" organizations are interested in polic" and act to influence the political process
through such mechanisms as lo##"ing$ and ultimatel"$ to hat e&tent the" are
influential as socio7political actors! ( comparison is also made among interest groups
in Japan$ South .orean$ the CS and <erman"! +he stud" is uni,ue in that it not onl"
gauged political activities among interest groups #ut their perception (al#eit self7
evaluation) of their on capacities as polic" pla"ers! (mong its interesting findings is
that nearl" all of the groups sampled are interested in polic"$ ith la#or$ political and
agricultural groups$ as among the most politicized and most active! *oever$
Japanese interest groups generall" do not consider themselves as influential in
effecting or revising policies! (nother interesting finding is that the #ureaucrac"$
agricultural organizations and foreign and international actors are perceived as having
the most poerful influence! ;n the other hand$ mass media$ la#or$ consumer$ and
civil organizations are perceived to #e among the eakest!
+hese orks$ hoever$ dealt #roadl" ith civil societ" in general and not on a
specific interest group as a polic" actor! 6ogt and 1ersch (200Da)$ narroing don
their stud" of interest groups into migrant support organizations$ found that most
migrant support organizations are concerned ith providing services to assist or
improve living and orking conditions rather than efforts toard actual polic"
changes! 8ost of them$ even the large ones such as the Solidarit" 8igrant Support
Netork or -9uuren$ remain fi&ated in local activism and rarel" e&pand their range to
the national or transnational arena! 6ogt and 1ersch$ hoever$ do not pa" particular
focus on a specific migrant group!
6ogt and 1ersch in another stud" (200D#) surve"ed migrant support
organizations and validated 2ekkanen%s vie of a dual civil societ" in Japan!
*oever$ in contrast to 2ekkanen$ their findings sho that rising num#er of salaried
staff do not necessaril" trigger a concomitant rise in professional lo##"ing activities!
(ll these previous studies offered no conclusive assessment of ho successful
migrant support organizations are in improving the living and orking conditions of
foreigners in Japan! None offered to e&plain hether the activities of support
organizations actuall" match the needs of migrants! +su9inaka et al! (200B) attempted
to e&plain the role of interest groups in polic" d"namics through hat the" refer as the
structure of influence! +he" did so$ first$ through a su#9ective scale in hich leaders
evaluate their groups% poer to influence4 and second through an o#9ective scale in
hich the group is evaluated in terms of its success in #locking$ making or revising
policies! But the" never focused their attention on the stakeholders$ the individuals
ho are supposed to #enefit from the gains of the interest groups! +his paper attempts
to address this gap$ al#eit focusing solel" on Filipino migrants!
- define a stakeholder as an" entit" ith a declared or conceiva#le interest or
stake in a polic" concern! +he" can #e individuals$ organizations$ or unorganized
groups! - use it to refer to persons or groups hose interests and activities strongl"
affect and are affected #" the issues concerned$ ho have a Estake% in a change$ ho
control relevant information and resources and hose support is needed in order to
implement change ((ligica 2006)! +he" are hat Freeman (5ABF) defines as groups
ithout hose support an organization ould cease to e&ist!
Filipino migrants as clients are crucial$ if not a primar" stakeholder$ in the
services that migrant support organizations provide! +o meet their e&pectations$
therefore$ ould #enefit groups orking for their cause to elevate their agenda on the
ider polic" platform!
:o##$ 0oss$ and 0oss (5AD6) identified the outside initiative model as one of
three models of agenda #uilding #ased on the four ma9or characteristics of issue
F
careers (initiation$ specification$ e&pansion and entrance)! +he outside initiative model
accounts for the process through hich issues arise in nongovernmental groups and
are then e&panded sufficientl" to reach$ first$ the pu#lic agenda$ and finall"$ the formal
agenda! Four different groups can #ecome involved as an issue e&pands #e"ond its
originators/ the identification group$ the attention group$ the attentive pu#lic and the
general pu#lic! 8em#ers of the identification group are people ho feel strong ties to
the originators of an issue and ho see their on interest as tied to those raising the
issue!
- am putting emphasis on the identification group #ecause this to m" mind is
here Filipino migrants as stakeholders should #elong if the" are to put the issue of
immigration reform as a polic" agenda! Not onl" are mem#ers of an identification
group the first to #e mo#ilized$ the" are also the most likel" to support the position of
originators! (n e&ample of issue e&pansion to mem#ers of an identification group is
the definition of a controvers" in terms of regional$ ethnic or religious interest (:o##
and Glder 5ADH)!
Filipino migrants$ hoever$ comprise at the ver" least a eak identification
group since the" are largel" unaffected #" reforming Japan%s polic" toard migrants
as a polic" agenda! ( num#er of inferences ma" #e raised to e&plain this! For one$
Filipinos in Japan generall" do not intend to sta" long and$ hence$ have no stake even
if there is massive change in policies favoring migrants! (lso$ the" generall" prefer
support organizations to remain as the" are$ to provide services like legal assistance$
counseling and financial support! +he" do not look at support organizations as tools
for setting agenda ith reforming migration polic" as end!
+hese sentiments are vital for support organizations hich naturall" must suit
their services to the e&pectations of their supposed stakeholders! (ccording to 1oseke
(2003)$ social pro#lem activists (such as interest groups) are claim7makers$ alongside
the media and scientists! :onstructing conditions in a"s that mem#ers of a societ" as
audience consider them to #e social pro#lems is hat claim makers should do to in
the social pro#lems game! +his orks far easier$ sa"s 1oseke$ if claim7makers o#tain
social pro#lem onership! Social pro#lem onership is hen one particular pro#lem
diagnostic frame #ecomes the taken7for7granted frame for that pro#lem! For this to
ork$ Filipino migrants must then #e constructed positivel" to make them appear as
deserving of a pu#lic polic" to alleviate their plight and make the pu#lic s"mpathetic
to their cause! But this #ecomes pro#lematic if Filipino migrants themselves do not
seek to change social polic" or if the" themselves do not see their plight as something
that re,uires a ma9or overhaul of institutions or the legal s"stem!
-t then #ecomes important to esta#lish not onl" hat Filipino migrants reall"
ant (hether a polic" change or 9ust more services) and hether these needs are not
addressed in the present s"stem as to make polic" change urgent! -t is also important
to esta#lish to hat e&tent support organizations are meeting these needs #ecause if
Filipino migrants do not reall" desire something as massive as a change in Japan%s
migration polic" then there is no urgenc" for support organizations to advocate for it!
But do Filipino migrants themselves #elieve in the urgenc" of reforming Japanese
immigration policies' ;r do piecemeal improvements in the s"stem ork 9ust fine for
them' =hat do the" ant support groups to do'
Filipino as an important migrant group
+here are man" empirical 9ustifications for an e&amination of Filipino migrant
support organizations in Japan! Filipinos no comprise the fourth largest group of
foreigners in Japan (+a#le 5) and the figure does not even take into account those ho
H
are undocumented! Not onl" is the population of Filipinos in Japan rising significantl"
in recent "ears (3HI in 200H)$ one out of nine of this population is of orking age!
8oreover$ females constitute a huge proportion of this orking age Filipino migrant
population (a#out nine out of 50 Filipinos in Japan)!
(ccording to the population of foreign residents in 200H #" nationalit"$
.orean nationals num#er FD3 thousand to constitute the #iggest group$ folloed #"
:hinese nationals (3H3 thousand)$ Brazilian nationals (25H thousand)$ 2hilippine
nationals (526 thousand)$ etc! ( comparison of the population of foreign residents #"
nationalit" in 200H ith that in 2000 reveals that the num#ers of .orean and Cnited
States nationals decreased #" 50!DI and 0!6I$ respectivel"$ hile the num#ers of
:hinese$ Brazilian$ 2hilippine and 2eruvian nationals increased significantl" #"
3A!6I$ 5F!FI$ 3H!0I and 20!3I$ respectivel"! +his indicates that nationalities are not
onl" diversif"ing$ Filipinos are #ecoming a large component of this demographic
transformation!
Table 1. Foreigners by nationality and age (2005)
Source: Statistics Bureau, Summary of esults, Population of Japan, Final Report of the 2005 Population Census
(!a"an: #inistry of $nternal %ffairs and &ommunication, 200').
+herefore$ the living and orking conditions that Filipino migrants endure$ the
d"namics of ho the" tr" to transform their condition$ as ell as the efforts of
individuals or groups that ork for their cause are orth e&amining!
Methodology
+o determine hether Filipino support organizations are merel" support
groups or engage in political advocac"$ - e&amined the stated goals and services of
organizations under the Solidarit" Netork ith 8igrants Japan or -9uuren$ the largest
migrant support netork in Japan$ and several other Filipino support organizations!
+his as done through literature revie$ internet data#ase search$ and descriptive
content anal"sis!
(fterards$ structured intervies ere conducted ith .apatiran (hich is
allied ith -9uuren and listed in the director" of :ommission on Filipino ;verseas and
hose primar" service is to provide counseling services to distressed migrants)! Semi7
structured intervies ere also conducted ith .apatiran volunteers and clients! +he
purpose of these intervies as to corro#orate the content anal"sis and to learn first
6
hand the services that a t"pical Filipino support organization provides migrants$ as
ell as hether or not the" are active in the immigration polic" d"namics!
+o determine ho these services fit the e&pectation of Filipino migrants as
stakeholders$ - conducted a surve" and unstructured intervies ith Filipino migrants
in +ok"o in ;cto#er 2050 in hich respondents ere asked$ among other things$
hether the" have availed of services offered #" support organizations$ ho the
services match their needs$ and their idea of hat support organizations should #e!
+he surve" aimed to gauge ho Filipino migrants as stakeholders vie the
interventions #" migrant support organizations as service providers$ and hether
these interventions actuall" correspond to hat the" claim the" need! +he surve" as
also meant to ascertain hether Filipino migrants themselves ant support
organizations to advocate policies in their #ehalf or are content ith them as support
service providers!
+here ere originall" 200 surve" ,uestionnaires distri#uted to Filipinos in
+ok"o (Jotsu"a$ 8eguro$ 0oppongi and Jokohama)$ of hich onl" 55F gave their
replies! +he to7page surve" ,uestionnaire as ritten in Filipino since as 8oser and
.alton (5AD5) suggest$ hen designing a surve" it is #est to #e >in the position of the
t"pical$ or rather the least educated$ respondent? (p! 320)! Fourteen ,uestions ere
asked$ the most crucial to m" purpose #eing the folloing/
a! =hether the respondent is a mem#er of an organization in Japan and the t"pe
of organization (KH$ K6)
#! =ho the respondent t"picall" approaches for help and the common pro#lems
for hich help is sought (KD$ KB)
c! *o respondents rate the assistanceLintervention provided (KA)
d! +he t"pical serviceLintervention that the organization the" approach offers
(K50)
e! =hat respondents think migrant support organizations should do or provide
(K55$ K52$ K53)
f! =hether respondents intend to sta" in Japan for long (K5F)!
(dmittedl"$ there are limitations to this approach! For one$ the stud" limits
itself to Filipino support and Filipino7related interest groups! *o to determine hich
of the hundreds of migrant support organization in Japan specificall" cater to
Filipinos$ or to one particular migrant group for that matter$ is also pro#lematic!
Support organizations t"picall" do not cater to a specific group! (lso$ even though
man" Filipino support groups first started ith Filipinos in mind$ in time the" have
e&panded their reach to include all migrants$ as the case of .apatiran shos!
(lso$ the surve" as limited to +ok"o and ith a marginal sample of 55F
respondents so the findings ma" not necessaril" #e conclusive of the population of
Filipino migrants in Japan! +hose interested in conducting similar studies or
replicating this approach ould do #est to include respondents from other prefectures
to o#tain a countr"ide perspective and adopt more comprehensive statistical tests to
validate the surve" results!
Discussion of preliminary findings
a Filipino migrant organi!ations are still primarily "ust support
organi!ations
-n a surve" conducted in 200D$ 6ogt and 1ersch found that hile migrant
support organizations are indeed highl" active in terms of helping migrants ith
ever"da" life issues$ political advocac" occurs on a case to case #asis and highl"
D
concentrated on the local level! 2olitical advocac" rarel" occurs on a national or
transnational level not even among organizations ith salaried staff (hich #"
2ekkanen%s account should have e&panded their action to the political sphere)! 6ogt
and 1ersch (200D) conclude that migrant support organizations are not successful
polic" advocates for foreigners #ecause the" are knit closel" to the structure of
interdependence that #inds political actors in Japan! -n other ords$ the propensit" to
engage in service provision is not a matter of choice #ut more of a restriction imposed
on them #" Japan%s tight political opportunit" structure!
8" on anal"sis of the programs and o#9ectives of -9uuren mem#er
organizations and a select num#er of Filipino migrant support organizations confirm
these findings! - identified DA migrant support organizations$ D2 ere allied ith the
-9uuren$ and si& ere #ased on hat - gathered from internet research! 8ost of these
organizations limit their activities to providing migrants ith support for ever"da"
concerns particularl" through counseling services! -n fact$ a#out seven in 50 of the
organizations studied offer counseling services! ;f these organizations$ a#out one in
five offers language and cultural integration support! Similarl"$ a#out one in five
offers migrant assistance to meet their ever"da" needs! (lso a#out one in five
provides legal assistance or paralegal support!
Table 1. Number of organizations providing counseling services
(rgani)ations *+ic+ indicate or say t+ey
"ro,ide counseling Fre-uency .ercent
/0S 51 12.15
2( 1' 20.25
2% ' 1.53
Total 13 1004
Note/ N( means that the organization either caters strictl" to a specific migrant group other than Filipinos (e!g!$ .oreans) or
pu#lished no information a#out its services!
;nl" a#out three in ten of the sampled organizations engage in some form of
information campaign (pu#lish regular nesletters and conduct seminars)! ;nl" a#out
to in ten are engaged in some form of advocac" and lo##"ing!
Table 2. Number of organizations providing counseling services
(rgani)ations *+ic+ indicate or say t+ey
engage in ad,ocacy Fre-uency .ercent
/0S 15 11.12
2( 53 15.'6
2% ' 1.53
Total 13 1004
Note/ N( means that the organization either caters strictl" to a specific migrant group other than Filipinos (e!g!$ .oreans) or
pu#lished no information a#out its services!
6er" fe organizations (in fact$ 9ust to) sa" the" maintain some contact ith
local leaders or elected officials! Similarl"$ onl" si& sa" the" maintain some contact or
linkage ith government agencies!
b #he role of the religious: #he case of $apatiran
-f Japan%s tight political constrains hinder migrant support organizations from
evolving into advocac" organizations$ ho do migrant support organizations manage
to continue'
( considera#le num#er of organizations orking for the cause of Filipinos in
Japan are actuall" organizations attached to religious congregations or churches!
:hurch7#ased organizations are ,uite popular$ especiall" among Filipino migrants to
B
hom the e&pression of faith is almost a cultural trait! :onsider the case of .apatiran$
hich provides counseling and legal support to foreigners! -nitiall" a pilot pro9ect of
the NS.. diocese of +ok"o$ .apatiran as formall" esta#lished as a non7government
organization under the +ok"o (nglican church in 5ABB! .apatiran in Filipino literall"
means fraternit" (sisterhood or #rotherhood) and as named as such #ecause the
organization initiall" catered to Filipinas in need of ps"cho7social and material
support! No$ of course$ it provides support for all foreign nationals living in Japan!
+his is done mainl" through phone and face7to7face counseling$ and hen necessar"
through linkage ith em#assies$ government offices$ hospitals$ as ell as the
-mmigration Bureau! ;n a case #" case #asis$ it also provides mediation to pro#lems$
such as those involving domestic violence!
+he organization has a#out 30 mem#ers$ most of hich are volunteers! +here
are a#out si& volunteers ho ork regularl" and assist in the da" to da" operation of
the office! *itomi Jokote$ ho sits in .apatiran%s Board$ sa"s the main purpose of the
organization is to help migrants deal ith ever"da" life issues! +his is t"picall"
accomplished through telephone and face7to7face counseling$ providing ph"sical
support$ esta#lishing a netork for Filipino omen living in Japan$ pu#lishing the
Sampaguita Nesletter$ and #" holding fund raising events to finance its activities!
8ost of its funds are provided #" the Nihon Sei .ou .ai (NS..) or the (nglican
)iocese in +ok"o although sometimes it receives private donations!
(s of Jul" 2050 it had handled 5D0 cases$ the most common #eing domestic
violence (H5)$ issues related to parenting and child care (5D)$ and marriage pro#lems
(52)! )omestic violence and marital pro#lems seem to #e the most fre,uent issues
presented #efore .apatiran caseorkers!
.apatiran also orks closel" ith other support organizations in Japan like the
JF: Netork and the :atholic +ok"o -nternational :enter! -t is part of the Solidarit"
8igrant Netork Japan (-9uuren) and is included in the list of recognized Filipino
support organization under the director" of the :ommission on Filipino ;verseas
(:F;)!
.apatiran$ hoever$ does not have an N2; status and is$ strictl" speaking$ a
church #ased organization! Jokote sa"s there is no need for the organization at this
time to seek N2; status as it is a#le to fulfill its duties ith its current status! (sked
ho she perceives the overall living condition of migrants in Japan$ she #elieves that
their condition is >neither good nor #ad!? (pril 8orito$ .apatiran%s program director$
admits that hile the living conditions of Filipinos in Japan are generall" #elo that
of the Japanese$ Filipinos are faring #etter compared to other migrant groups!
.apatiran$ according to 8orito$ is not lo##"ing for the passage of a la or
ordinance that ill reform migration las in Japan! -t has had no contact ith a
mem#er of the )iet or ith a representative of an" agenc" other than the 8inistr" of
Justice! *oever$ it does advocate for migration polic" reforms and other migrant
issues! -t plans$ for instance$ to draft a position paper a#out the pro#lems and concerns
of Japanese Filipino children and migrant families in Japan! +he paper ill #e
su#mitted to the 2hilippine Gm#ass"$ ho ill$ in turn$ present it to 2resident Benigno
(,uino --- for discussion on his ne&t visit to Japan!
Jokote clarifies that .apatiran is not in an" a" tr"ing to influence political
decision making in Japan! Neither does it intend to$ even if given the opportunit"! For
one$ she sa"s$ to engage in political advocac" entails su#stantial financial constraints!
8orito$ for her part$ sa"s that even if .apatiran ants to$ it simpl" cannot #ecause it
neither has the resources nor the manpoer to em#ark on lo##"ing$ protests or
mo#ilizations! 8ost of .apatiran%s caseorkers are volunteers ho themselves have
A
other 9o#s other than counseling distressed migrants! -n other ords$ logistics alone
ould inhi#it .apatiran from 9oining the fora" of polic" advocates!
Both Jokote and 8orito #elieve in the role of local groups and support
organizations in alleviating the plight of migrants in Japan! *oever$ the" also
emphasize the role of government as important$ in order to achieve lasting or long
term change!
b Are Filipino migrants policy sta%eholders or passive bystanders&
-n a surve"$ - asked Filipinos a num#er of ,uestions to gauge$ among others$
ho the" eigh the services or interventions migrant support organizations provide4
their vie on hat migrant support organizations should #e4 and the e&tent to hich
these organizations meet their e&pectation! +he median respondents (3HI) have lived
more than 50 "ears in Japan! *oever$ 2DI of m" respondents sa" the" have spent
less than a "ear in the countr"! (#out 22I (one in five) have #een living in Japan for
si& to ten "ears!
Table 3. Respondents length of stay in Japan
7engt+ of stay in !a"an Fre-uency .ercent
7ess t+an one year 81 21.13
(ne to fi,e years 16 15.13
Si9 to ten years 25 21.38
#ore t+an ten years 50 85.03
Total 115 1004
;nl" a#out four out of ten respondents (3AI) sa" the" are affiliated ith an
organization or association! (#out 65I of m" respondents sa" the" do not #elong to
an organization or association of an" kind!
Table . !"# $o you belong to an association or organization %e.g.& neighborhood association& union& 'ilipino
organization& etc.() %a( *+, %b( N-
#ember of an organi)ation or
association:
Fre-uency .ercent
/0S 55 86.'0
2( 10 '1.50
Total 115 1004
(#out HDI or more than half of the Filipino migrants surve"ed ith
affiliations sa" the" #elong or are affiliated ith church7#ased or church related
organizations! +he rest are mem#ers of student organizations$ Filipino organizations$
omen organizations$ neigh#orhood associations and socio7civic organizations!
0ecall$ hoever$ that a#out si& in 50 of the migrants surve"ed do not #elong to an
organization (see +a#le F$ KH)! *ence$ hile it appears that Filipino migrants are
commonl" affiliated ith church7#ased organization$ on the hole a considera#le
ma9orit" do not #elong to an" organization at all!
Table 5. ;': $f you ans*ered /0S to ;5, *+at ty"e of organi)ation:
Ty"e of organi)ation Fre-uency .ercent
&+urc+ 25 5'.61
Fili"ino (rgani)ation ' 18.'5
Student (rgani)ation ' 18.'5
50
<omen=s (rgani)ation 8 '.62
#igrant (rgani)ation 2 5.55
Socio>ci,ic (rgani)ation 1 2.21
2eig+bor+ood %ssociation 1 2.21
Total 55 1004
(#out three in 50 respondents (30I) sa" the" first go to the 2hilippine
em#ass" or consulate henever the" get into trou#le or have pro#lems! +he church is
also popular among the Filipino migrants - surve"ed as a place to get help$ and is
preferred #" one in five respondents (5AI)! -nterestingl"$ #arel" one in 50
respondents (9ust 6I) approaches a Filipino organization hen the" encounter
pro#lems in Japan! +he rest seek help from Filipino friends$ Japanese friends$
emplo"ers or sponsors!
Table '. ;1: <+o do you a""roac+ first *+en you get into trouble: (e.g., o,erstaying ,isa, breac+ of
em"loyment contract, domestic ,iolence, etc)
<+o do you a""roac+ first *+en you get
into trouble: Fre-uency .ercent
.+ili""ine 0mbassy?&onsulate 85 23.62
&+urc+ 22 13.80
Fili"ino friend 11 15.31
!a"anese friend 10 6.11
S"onsor 10 6.11
Fili"ino (rgani)ation 1 '.15
0m"loyer ' 5.2'
Family 2 1.15
%d,iser?teac+er 2 1.15
2@( 1 0.66
.olice 1 0.66
!a"anese 7a*yer 1 0.66
2eig+bor+ood %ssociation 1 0.66
Total 115 1004
6isa related concerns appear to #e the most common pro#lem ith hich
Filipino migrants seek help (5AI)! ;ther common issues include financial related
concerns (5DI)$ finding emplo"ment (55I)$ health (50I)$ and school7related
concerns (AI)! ;nl" HI of the respondents cite ork related a#use as a t"pical
pro#lem! 1ess than 2I approach organizations to report or seek help against spousal
a#use or domestic violence! +his appears to contradict .apatiran%s e&perience (case
stud") in hich the most common cases received for counseling involves domestic
violence! (#out 5DI of the respondents sa" the" have not had an" pro#lem grave
enough to seek help!
Table 1. ;6: <+at is t+e most ty"ical "roblem you refer for +el":
Ty"ical "roblem Fre-uency .ercent
Aisa related 22 13.80
Financial 13 1'.'1
Finding a Bob 18 11.50
Cealt+ 12 10.58
Sc+ool related 10 6.11
<orD related abuse ' 5.2'
S"ousal abuse?domestic ,iolence 2 1.15
&ustody of c+ildren 2 1.15
translation 1 0.66
%sDing for directions 1 0.66
ot+er 1 '.15
none 13 1'.'1
55
Total 55 1004
Ne&t$ - asked respondents to rate the services or intervention the" receive
(KA)! (#out 22I or one in five find the services the" receive to #e ver" good$ 32I
percent think the" are good$ and FFI or close to half of the respondents find the
services satisfactor"! *oever$ there ere to respondents ho rated the services
the" received as >ver" #ad!? +his indicates that Filipino migrants in general are
satisfied ith the services the" receive from the organizations hich intervene for
them and provide assistance hen the" encounter trou#le in Japan!
;3: To *+at e9tent do you feel +a,e t+e "eo"le or organi)ation in ;1 been +el"ful to you:
Co* +el"ful: Fre-uency .ercent
Aery @ood 25 21.38
@ood 81 82.5'
Satisfactory 50 58.6'
Bad 0 0.00
Aery Bad 2 1.15
Total 115 1004
- also asked a#out the t"pical service or assistance migrants receive from the
organizations or persons the" approach (K50)! :ounseling appears to #e the most
t"pical intervention (HBI) that support organizations e&tend to Filipinos ho seek
their assistance! +his as folloed #" financial assistance (5HI)! 1egal assistance
(DI) and t"pical ever"da" concerns such as providing food and clothing (FI)$ and
talking to government agencies in their #ehalf (such as #efore the 8inistr" of Justice
or the local ard office (FI)$ are also mentioned! -nterestingl"$ a#out 6I of the
respondents sa" the" get no assistance or help from the organization or person the"
approach!
Table 3. ;10: <+at +el" or assistance do you get from t+e organi)ation or "erson:
Ty"ical +el" recei,ed Fre-uency .ercent
&ounseling '' 51.63
Financial assistance 11 15.31
7egal assistance 3 1.63
TalDing to bureaucrats or agency officials 5 5.83
@i,ing food and clot+es 5 5.83
%ssistance in obtaining documents 1 0.66
TalDing to elected officials 1 0.66
Seminar 1 0.66
ot+er 2 1.15
none 1 '.15
Total 115 1004
Ne&t$ - asked respondents hat for them should #e the most important service
or intervention a support organization ought to provide (K55)! - also asked hat for
them is the most important service or intervention the" currentl" receive from migrant
support organizations (K52)$ and$ if the services are lacking$ hat the" feel these
support organizations should do or provide instead (K53)!
Table 10. ;11: <+at in your o"inion is t+e most im"ortant ser,ice or inter,ention a migrant su""ort
organi)ation s+ould "ro,ide:
#ost im"ortant ser,ice organi)ations s+ould
"ro,ide Fre-uency .ercent
52
.ro,ide legal, material and financial su""ort 68 12.61
&onduct seminars 2' 22.61
#obili)e "rotests to "ress for migrants= rig+ts 5 8.51
2% 1 0.66
Total 115 1004

Seven in 50 respondents (D3I) consider support services as the most
important service that migrant support organizations should provide! Support services
in this case refer to legal assistance$ material aid$ and financial support@concerns that
affect the da" to da" lives of migrants! (#out one in five respondents (23I) thinks it
is important for migrant support organizations to conduct seminars$ particularl" those
that help apprise migrants of their rights and recourse under the la! ;nl" FI of the
respondents #elieve organizations should go out organizing protests or mo#s to press
for migrants% rights and elfare!
+his coincides ith hat Filipino migrants consider as the most important
help the" receive from migrant support organizations! 8a9orit" of the Filipino
migrants - surve"ed (HBI) consider support for ever"da" e&istence (legal$ material
and financial) as the most important of the interventions or assistance the" receive
from organizations! :ounseling follos$ preferred #" one in three respondents (30I)!
*o a#out efforts to change the legal s"stem in Japan in favor of migrants'
-nterestingl"$ onl" a#out one in 50 of the migrants surve"ed (55I) consider current
efforts #" migrant support organizations to change immigration la as important!
Table 11. ;12: (f t+e inter,entions or assistance you recei,e at "resent, *+ic+ do you consider
as t+e most im"ortant:
#ost im"ortant +el" or ser,ice currently recei,ed Fre-uency .ercent
.ro,ide legal, material and financial su""ort '' 51.63
.ro,ide counseling to Fili"ino migrants 85 23.62
%d,ocate for t+e reform of immigration "olicies or la*s in !a"an 18 11.50
2% 1 0.66
Total 115 1004
+here is consistenc" among Filipino migrants as to hat the" consider to #e
the most important intervention that a migrant support organization should provide!
(s a supplement to K55$ - asked respondents hat services organizations should
render or provide instead if current services are inade,uate (K52)! :lose to seven in
50 respondents (6BI) still consider support services (legal$ material$ and financial
support) as the most important that should #e provided! -t is important to note$
hoever$ that a#out one in five respondents (22I) #elieves that organizations also
need to e&ert efforts to change Japanese immigration las$ such as orking for the
reform of policies in #ehalf of migrant Filipinos!
Table 12. ;18: <+at s+ould organi)ations "ro,ide instead:
<+at organi)ations s+ould "ro,ide instead Fre-uency .ercent
.ro,ide legal, material and financial su""ort 11 '1.55
%d,ocate for t+e reform of immigration "olicies or la*s in !a"an 25 21.38
#obili)e "rotests to "ress for migrants= rig+ts 10 6.11
&onduct seminar for Fili"ino migrants 1 0.66
2% 1 0.66
Total 115 1004
53
-t is also orth noting that of the Filipino migrants surve"ed$ more than half
(HFI) do not intend to remain for long in Japan! +o remain for long in this case means
to sta" in Japan for 20 "ears or more or to appl" for permanent residenc"! But of
course it can also #e said that Filipino migrants are divided #eteen those ho do not
ant to sta" long and those ho ant to sta" for good! (#out 2I of the respondents
sa" the" are undecided so it is safe to sa" that 9ust half intend to sta" in Japan for long!
=hat could #e the reason h" the" do not plan on sta"ing long' Japan is a
ealth" countr"$ offers comforta#le living$ and has one of the loest crime rates in
the orld! -n m" intervies ith respondents$ - learned that a considera#le num#er of
Filipinos have no intentions of sta"ing long or for good #ecause the" kno Japan%s
migration s"stem is neither as friendl" nor open as in :anada or the CS here an
applicant ma" #e entitled permanent residenc" 9ust #" living in those countries for a
certain num#er of "ears! -n Japan$ a foreigner must have lived for at least ten "ears
and e&hi#it sufficient facilit" ith the language #efore he or she can appl" for
permanent residenc"! But even so$ ac,uiring citizenship is an entirel" different stor"!
(ccording to Filipinos - intervieed$ there is no point in orking to change
immigration las unless the change pertains to genuine policies that integrate
migrants into societ" and grant them access to #ecome permanent mem#ers of the
societ" such as citizenship!
Table 12. ;18: Eo you intend to stay long in !a"an (e.g., 20 years or more, or ac-uire "ermanent
residency):
Eo you intend to stay long in !a"an Fre-uency .ercent
/0S 50 58.6'
2( '2 55.83
Fndecided 2 1.15
Total 115 1004
-n other ords$ if immigration polic" reform merel" pertains to piecemeal
solutions that iden #asic rights #ut do not reall" grant full participation (such as
citizenship)$ Filipino migrants think the" are #etter off if support organizations 9ust
ork toard providing #etter support services$ particularl" those that cater to their
ever"da" concerns and make living in Japan more #eara#le!
Conclusion
Filipino migrant support organizations appear to #e t"picall" service7providing
organizations$ not polic" advocates! 8ost migrant support organizations aid distressed
Filipinos #" providing ever"da" support services and counseling #ut rarel" do the" go
out and engage in efforts to reform the Japanese immigration s"stem itself!
*oever$ there are to important o#servations that need to #e stressed! ;ne is
the role of church7#ased organizations as vectors of migrant support! +he other is the
changing outlook$ even among traditionall" service7oriented organizations! (s
.apatiran%s case shos$ some migrant support organizations are no also graduall"
engaging in some sort of advocac" even though the" do not participate in lo##"ing or
mass actions! (lso$ hile the failure of support service organizations to shift into
polic" advocac" is #lamed on Japan%s stiff political structure$ the underl"ing reason
h" organizations do not take this path ma" #e more #asic! -n .apatiran%s case$ for
instance$ political advocac" ould entail additional funds and manpoer@tradeoffs
that an organization rel"ing on church donations can ill afford!
5F
But ho do Filipino migrants eigh the services these support organizations
provide' (s purported stakeholders$ ho do the" look at migrant support
organizations to #egin ith'
+he results of m" surve" among Filipino migrants in +ok"o suggest that
Filipino migrants themselves do not regard support organizations as an"thing #e"ond
service providers! -n fact$ Filipinos themselves do not consider changing Japanese
immigration policies as important as improving the provision of ever"da" support
services that the" need to lead ordinar" lives in a foreign countr"! 8ost e&pect
nothing more than migrant support organizations to provide legal$ material and
financial support! Neither do the" e&pect these organizations to advocate for reforms
in immigration policies$ or amendments in las that ill #enefit Filipinos in Japan! -t
is interesting to note that even though a considera#le num#er of the respondents have
#een living in Japan for more than 50 "ears$ a#out half of them do not intend to sta"
long! -n other ords$ even long time residents still consider themselves as transient!
+his ma" e&plain h" the" are generall" indifferent to an" efforts to change the legal
structure of immigration!
;f course$ this is 9ust an o#servation and in no a" should #e taken as
conclusive! For one$ the surve" as limited to Filipino migrants in +ok"o! -nitiall"$
200 surve" ,uestionnaires ere distri#uted #ut onl" 55F "ielded replies! 8oreover$
the findings ere limited to descriptive anal"sis! - also encountered une&pected
difficulties in running the surve"! Filipino migrants$ at least those - encountered
during the surve"$ appear to #e apprehensive or suspicious a#out the motives of a
surve" directed to them! >(re "ou orking for immigration'? as a t"pical ,uestion -
encountered during field ork! +his ,uestion ould #e raised even though - ould
e&plain #eforehand the purpose of the surve" and the fact that the ,uestionnaire did
not even ask for their names or other personal details!
Nevertheless$ it is apparent@at least #ased on preliminar" findings@that
migrant support organizations ill have difficult" tapping on Filipino migrants to
support efforts toard Japanese immigration polic" reform! =hether support
organizations should #ecome political advocates appears to #e the least of their
concerns! 0eforms in Japan%s immigration policies ma" #e significant for Filipinos in
general$ as it is ith other migrant groups$ #ut it does not appear to #e hat the"
desire most at the moment!
Further research ma" ell consider e&panding the sample size and including
respondents from other prefectures to o#tain a countr"ide perspective! -t ma" also
#e important to adopt more comprehensive statistical tests to validate the surve"
results! Future research ma" also look into the role of #ureaucrats or agencies that
regulate the activities of nonprofit organizations to determine to hat e&tent the"
discourage or encourage the activities of civil societ" organizations!
'eferences
(ligica$ 2aul )ragos! 2006! >-nstitutional and Stakeholder 8apping/ Frameorks
for 2olic" (nal"sis and -nstitutional :hange!? Public Organization Review 6$
DAMA0!
Brugha$ 0uairi$ and Nsuzsa 6arvazovszk"! 2000! >Stakeholder (nal"sis/ ( 0evie!?
Health Policy and Planning 5H(3)$ 23A72F6!
:o##$ 0oger$ and :harles Glder! 5ADH! Participation in American Politics. The
Dynamics of Agenda uilding! Baltimore/ Johns *opkins 2ress!
5H
:o##$ 0oger$ Jennie7.eith 0oss and 8arc *oard 0oss! 5AD6! >(genda Building as
a :omparative 2olitical 2rocess!? American Political !cience Review D0(5)/
526753B!
-arossi$ <iuseppe! 2006! The Power of !urvey Design" A #ser$s %uide for &anaging
!urveys' (nterpreting Results' and (nfluencing Respondents! =ashington$ )!:!/
+he =orld Bank!
Freeman$ 0! G! 5ABF! !trategic &anagement" A !ta)eholder Approach! Boston 8(/
2itman!
.landermans$ Bert$ and Suzanne Staggen#org! Gds! 2002! &ethods of !ocial
&ovement Research! 8inneapolis/ Cniversit" of 8innesota 2ress!
.eck$ 8argaret G!$ and .athr"n Sikkink! 5AAB! Activists eyond orders" Advocacy
*etwor)s in (nternational Politics! -thaca/ :ornell Cniversit" 2ress!
8oser$ :!(!$ and <! .alton! 5AD5! !urvey &ethods in !ocial (nvestigations! 1ondon/
*einemann Gducational Book 1imited!
1inden#erg$ 8arc$ and Ben9amin :ros#"! 5AB5! &anaging Development" The
Political Dimension! :onnecticut/ .umarian 2ress!
1oseke$ )onileen! 2003! Thin)ing About !ocial Problems" An (ntroduction to
+onstructionist Perspectives! Ne Jork/ (ldine de <u"ter!
2ekkanen$ 0o#ert! 2006! ,apan-s Dual +ivil !ociety. :alifornia/ Stanford Cniversit"
2ress!
2harr$ Susan J! 2003! +argeting #" an (ctivist State/ Japan as a :ivil Societ" 8odel!
-n The !tate of +ivil !ociety in ,apan$ eds! F! J! Schartz and S! J! 2harr!
:am#ridge/ :am#ridge Cniversit" 2ress$ 3567336!
2iper$ Nicola$ and (nders Chlin! Gds! 200F! Transnational Activism in Asia" Problems
of Power and Democracy! 1ondon/ 0outledge!
2reston$ 1! G! 5AA0! >Stakeholder 8anagement and :orporate 2erformance!? Journal
of Behavioral Gconomics 5A(F)/ 3657DH!
0eimann$ .im )! 2050! +he 0ise of Japanese N<;s/ (ctivism from (#ove! Ne
Jork/ 0outledge!
+arro$ Sidne"! 200H! The *ew Transnational Activism! :am#ridge/ :am#ridge
Cniversit" 2ress!
+su9inaka$ Jutaka! Gd! 200B! :ivil Societ" and -nterest <roups in :ontemporar"
Japan$ trans! +akafumi ;htomo and 1eslie +kach7.aasaki!
6inken$ *enk$ and -sa#elle )iepstraten! 2050! From 2oliticization to :ulturalization
of :ivic Gngagement! -n :ivic Gngagement in :ontemporar" Japan$ eds!
*enk 6inken$ Juko Nishimura$ Bruce =hite$ and 8asa"uki )eguchi! Ne
Jork/ Springer$ 22D723B!
6ogt$ <a#riele$ and 2hilipp 1ersch! 200D! 8igrant Support ;rganizations in Japan/ (
8i&ed78ethod (pproach! -n ,apan .//0. Politi)' 1irtschaft und <esellschaft$
Gds! 8anfred 2ohl and -ris =ieczorek! Berlin/ 6ereinigung fOr
sozialissenschaftliche Japanforschung (<erman -nstitute for Japanese
Studies)$ 26H72BH!
6ogt$ <a#riele$ and 2hilipp 1ersch! 200D! 8igrant Support ;rganizations in Japan/ (
Surve"! =orking 2aper 0DL5! +ok"o/ <erman -nstitute for Japanese Studies!
56