New Policies for New Residents: Immigrants, Advocacy, and Governance in Japan and Beyond

2. National Policy Change Compared

2 NATIONAL POLICY CHANGE COMPARED Policy advocacy exerted under different forms of governance provides a comp­ arative perspective for interpreting national policy change in Japan. Although nongovernmental advocates have been influential in Italy, Korea, and Spain, the timing of their incorporation in national discussion, the source of advocacy that was effective in bringing about reforms, and the process through which their voices were incorporated into elite processes have varied. All three countries have enacted comprehensive reforms that, even if contested, moved them toward pro­ viding systematically for immigrant rights, protections, and social incorporation. Italy passed the Turco­Napolitano Law in 1998, which provided for rights and integration of immigrants alongside of immigration regulations. In Spain, Law 4/2000 of January 2000 provided for extensive rights of foreigners in tandem with immigration provisions. In Korea, a 2003 law eliminated an earlier industrial­ trainee system and established the Employment Permit System to clarify the status and rights of foreign migrants as workers; laws of 2006 and 2007 further provided for the treatment of foreigners and the integration of multicultural families. In the national politics of immigrant protections, these countries have under­ gone a similar shift over time in that elected political leaders gradually took on a stronger role compared with bureaucratic officials, but the countries diverged in the relative roles played nationally by civil society advocates versus local com­ munities. In Italy and Korea, national civil society advocacy played a key role, but in Spain, regional forces were pivotal. In Italy and Korea, civil society advo­ cates urged national changes to support immigrants; provisions for multilevel 44 45 NATIONAL POLICY CHANGE COMPARED governance of immigrant issues emanated from the national government, and national legislation set the parameters for local responses. In both countries, the process of formal devolution provided a framework for facilitating multilevel governance for immigrant policies. In Italy, in addition to civil society groups, representatives of subnational governments were involved in the national plan­ ning process. In Spain, although Spanish officials made some effort to include civil society groups in national corporatist consultation, the impact was weaker than in Italy,and civil society advocates focused their main efforts on the regional level. The already fairly devolved system of government enabled governance for immigrants to emerge locally and regionally and to then influence adoption of national standards through the role of a pivotal Catalan party and later through the Zapatero administration in 2004. These countries differed in the balance of influence by national civil society groups versus local communities, rather than there being a total lack of impact of either one. The group that led in advocacy, however, was frequently able to inter­ act in a contentious political environment so as to temper the effects of backlash following adoption of comprehensive immigrant legislation. Italy In Italy, the process of policymaking in regard to immigration evolved from one led by bureaucrats to one in which elected politicians and political parties dominated. In this process, civil society advocates had ties to both groups at the national level and formed the heart of a strong advocacy coalition, but local and regional governments reinforced their advocacy efforts.1 Legislation in 1998 pro­ duced comprehensive provisions on the treatment of immigrants and provided for a new multilevel governance structure that would include third­sector voices. Whereas both international and domestic developments stimulated the effort in the 1980s to develop immigration legislation, subsequent policy initiatives for immigrants emerged out of domestic processes and were intertwined with con­ tentious politics over immigration control by the late 1990s. Central bureaucrats in consultation with civil society groups played a key role in developing early policies on immigration; as the position of immigrants in society became more of a focus, civil society groups were able to play a stronger role through their ties to center­left political parties and later to the center­right. The context of the 1980s produced a need to specify clearer provisions for immigration. Immigration had been increasing since the late 1970s, and by the early 1980s several pressures existed to enact reforms. Italian policies had empha­ sized the status of Italians who emigrated abroad for work and did not provide 46 CHAPTER 2 for the type of immigration that was occurring. Domestically, Italy needed to make sure its laws conformed to its constitutional guarantees for foreigners. Internationally, Italy ratified an International Labor Organization convention on migrants in 1981;2 and recommendations of the Council...