IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcojxx/v30y2018i2p164-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protecting Japan from immigrants? An ethical challenge to security-based justification in immigration policy

Author

Listed:
  • Johan Rochel

Abstract

This article contributes to the growing interest in both the ethics of immigration and Japanese immigration studies by analysing the ethical justification of Japan’s immigration policy. The main objective of this article is to specify and address security-based justifications as part of an investigation into the ethical dimension of Japan’s immigration policy. Security is systematically drawn upon as one of the most powerful rationales to justify the competence claimed by Japan to control immigration as it deems adequate. The article will first specify the types of justification at stake. Second, it unpacks four understandings of security in immigration matters: as public order, as protection of welfare mechanisms, as cultural stability and as protection of social trust. Each of these justifications is bound with specific ethical challenges. Overall, the article maps the different justification strategies, their shortcomings and their advantages. The article intends to launch a proper ethical debate on Japan’s immigration policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Johan Rochel, 2018. "Protecting Japan from immigrants? An ethical challenge to security-based justification in immigration policy," Contemporary Japan, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 164-188, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcojxx:v:30:y:2018:i:2:p:164-188
    DOI: 10.1080/18692729.2018.1478938
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/18692729.2018.1478938
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/18692729.2018.1478938?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rcojxx:v:30:y:2018:i:2:p:164-188. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcoj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.