According to https://www.moneypost.jp/1310955/2/, while the Japanese population is rapidly declining, the foreign population is rapidly increasing, and currently accounts for around 3% of the total population, but if the current pace of “annual increase of 350,000 people” continues, the proportion of foreigners will exceed 10% by 2045, and by the 2060s there is a possibility that “one in five people will be foreigners.” Some estimates suggest that in the future, foreigners will outnumber Japanese. This article shows the ratio of nationals to permanent foreign residents in developed countries, and considers the characteristics of each country’s immigration policy.

In what follows, we use the “percentage of foreign-born population” as the main indicator for “settled foreigners,” which allows for easy comparison across countries, and supplement it with values ​​for “foreign nationals” and “resident foreigners” as necessary (the statistical definitions differ from country to country, and the differences in the figures also reflect this).

Japan’s Current Situation

As of late 2024, Japan hosts about 3.77 million foreign residents, equivalent to roughly 3% of the total population. The foreign population has been increasing by 300,000–400,000 annually, compensating for demographic decline and labor shortages. The government has introduced frameworks such as Specified Skilled Worker (SSW) and is reforming the Technical Intern Training Program, but Japan has not yet adopted a comprehensive “immigration policy.” Instead, it is still in a transitional phase, expanding labor-based entry in specific sectors while hesitating to present itself as a full-fledged immigration country.

North America: Permanent Immigration States

The United States has a foreign-born share of 13.9% (2022). Its immigration system is multilayered, with family reunification as the core pillar, complemented by employment-based visas, the Diversity Visa lottery, and refugee resettlement. Canada stands at 23% (2021), one of the highest in the developed world. Its hallmark is the points-based system and annual admission targets, with about 60% of inflows devoted to economic migrants. The U.S. emphasizes family and pluralism, while Canada embodies a planned, skill-oriented approach.

Oceania: The World’s Highest Immigration Intensity

Australia’s foreign-born share reached 31.5% in 2024, the highest among major economies. Its permanent migration program is explicitly planned—185,000 admissions in 2024/25, with a skill-to-family ratio of roughly 7:3. A points-based framework, with emphasis on English ability and work history, allows for targeted filling of labor shortages. New Zealand applies a similar model, but Australia remains the leading example of “immigration by design.”

Western Europe: High Ratios, Policy Reconfiguration

Germany has 18.2% foreign-born (2023). The 2023 Skilled Immigration Act expanded the EU Blue Card and introduced the Chancenkarte (“Opportunity Card”), allowing job-seekers to stay up to one year while searching, based on a flexible points system. France (10.7%, 2023) passed a new immigration law in 2024 balancing labor-market needs (e.g., regularization for shortage occupations) with tighter order and control. The UK had about 16% foreign-born (2021/22; closer to 18% by 2023). Post-Brexit, the UK moved to a points-based system but then raised wage thresholds in 2024/25 to curb inflows. Western Europe as a whole is recalibrating immigration: selective labor admission combined with stricter asylum and family reunification rules.

Small European States and Scandinavia

Switzerland has one of the highest ratios—about 27% foreign nationals in 2023. Free movement applies to EU/EFTA citizens, while quotas limit non-EU admissions. Immigration drives much of its population growth, but also fuels political debate. Sweden’s foreign-born share is around 20%. After taking in large numbers of refugees in 2015, it has shifted since 2022 toward stricter asylum and family rules, with stronger emphasis on integration and language requirements.

East Asia: Limited but Expanding Openness

South Korea crossed the 5% threshold in 2024/25. Its foreign residents include labor migrants, marriage migrants, and overseas Koreans. Policies now emphasize integration support and multicultural education, yet labor protections and anti-discrimination measures remain underdeveloped. Like Japan, Korea faces the dual challenge of ultra-low fertility and an aging population, making controlled but steady expansion of migration inevitable.

Comparative Overview of Foreign-Born or Foreign Resident Shares

  • Australia: 31.5% (foreign-born, 2024)
  • Canada: 23.0% (foreign-born, 2021)
  • Germany: 18.2% (foreign-born, 2023)
  • UK: 16% (foreign-born, 2021/22; ~18% in 2023)
  • France: 10.7% (immigrants, 2023)
  • US: 13.9% (foreign-born, 2022)
  • Switzerland: ~27% (foreign nationals, 2023)
  • Japan: ~3% (foreign residents, 2024)
  • South Korea: ~5% (foreign nationals, 2024/25)

(Note: “foreign-born” vs. “foreign nationality” differs. Europe usually reports the former, while Japan/Korea emphasize nationality-based residence statistics.)

Comparative Characteristics of Immigration Regimes

  1. Planned, selective models (Canada, Australia, Germany): rely on points systems, occupational lists, and annual quotas; short-term stays for work/study are linked to long-term settlement routes.
  2. Family-centered pluralism (US): immigration driven mainly by family reunification, with diverse secondary channels. Integration is decentralized and community-based.
  3. European recalibration (UK, France, Switzerland, etc.): balancing shortages with stricter conditions; asylum tightened, wage/language criteria raised.
  4. East Asian limited entry (Japan, Korea): labor-focused entry programs expanding cautiously, while comprehensive migration frameworks remain absent. Integration—education, housing, welfare, anti-discrimination—emerges as a decisive issue.

Lessons for Japan

  1. Statistical alignment: adopting “foreign-born” measures for international comparability.
  2. Designing both entry and settlement: fast-track mechanisms for shortage sectors must be linked to clear paths to permanent residence and family unity.
  3. Investing in integration: language education, credential recognition, housing, support for school-age children, and strong labor protections are indispensable. Europe’s experience shows that mismanaged integration can trigger political backlash.

Conclusion

The global experience of advanced economies shows that the decisive factor is not the scale of foreign inflows alone but the design philosophy—who is admitted, at what speed, and under what integration framework. For Japan, the key will be combining selective labor inflows with transparent settlement pathways, backed by integration investments and clear national goals. Without such a design, rising numbers of foreign residents will remain an ad hoc patch rather than a sustainable demographic solution.

Japan Immigration News