1. Introduction: Why Immigration Policy Needs Public Engagement
Immigration has become one of the most contentious public policy issues in democracies around the world, including the United Kingdom and Japan. Traditional representative decision-making often struggles to bridge deep divides on complex topics like migration, economic growth, labor shortages, and social cohesion. In January 2026, the UK House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee announced a novel approach: holding citizens’ assembly-style deliberative events on immigration across three locations, inviting ordinary citizens with diverse views to weigh trade-offs and seek consensus on policy options. These deliberative workshops will provide balanced expert information and structured discussions that go beyond typical public opinion polls, with outcomes intended to inform parliamentary scrutiny of government policy.
This initiative highlights a growing global interest in participatory and deliberative democracy as a way to better integrate citizen voices into policymaking—especially on topics as divisive as immigration. By empowering everyday people to deliberate thoughtfully, the UK model acknowledges that complex societal trade-offs cannot be fully understood through simplistic headline rhetoric or purely political debates. The question then arises: could similar approaches strengthen policy discourse in Japan, where immigration and demographic challenges are also becoming central to national debate?
2. UK Citizens’ Assemblies on Immigration: What They Are and Why They Matter
The UK Home Affairs Select Committee’s plan involves convening groups of around 100–105 residents across three sites (Leicester, North Tyneside and Renfrewshire) for weekend deliberations on immigration policy. Participants are selected to reflect local demographic and opinion diversity, and they are provided with balanced information and expert perspectives to help them explore difficult questions such as balancing net migration reduction with economic needs. The goal is not merely to gauge public opinion but to foster informed, respectful dialogue that reveals areas of consensus and contested tensions, directly feeding insights back to Parliament.
This method is rooted in the broader democratic innovation known as public deliberation—a process that involves citizens in deep engagement with policy dilemmas, rather than quick reactionary feedback. The OECD and others have documented an increase in deliberative processes worldwide, with hundreds of cases involving randomly selected citizens to address value-based public policy issues. Such processes are often used for complex, long-term policy challenges where technical expertise, ethical judgment, and social values intersect, making them highly relevant for immigration debates that involve economic, cultural, and human rights considerations.
3. Japan’s Existing Participatory Democracy Practices
In Japan, formal citizens’ assemblies at the national level are rare, but there is an expanding ecosystem of deliberative practices at the local level. Across the country, local governments and civil society groups have organized what are often called mini-publics (shimin-togikai and jumin-kyogikai) that bring together residents—sometimes selected by sortition—to discuss local planning, policy reviews, and community issues. Japan may in fact have one of the highest numbers of deliberative mini-publics in the world, with hundreds organized by municipalities and civic associations. These forums typically last one to several days and aim to gather a wide range of voices on issues such as local development and environmental planning, although they rarely tackle controversial national issues in depth.
These existing practices indicate that the infrastructure for public deliberation exists—academics, local governments, and civic actors have built a foundation for participatory engagement. However, Japan’s deliberative experiments are often localized and project-specific, with limited visibility or direct influence on national policy. Unlike the UK initiative, there is no federal mechanism to systematically use citizen deliberation on nationwide immigration policy or other polarizing topics.
4. Immigration Policy in Japan: Context and Challenges
Japan’s demographic trajectory—characterized by a rapidly aging population and labor shortages—has increasingly thrust immigration policy into the national spotlight. Major political debates and recent election campaigns have included calls for both tighter migration controls and more flexible approaches to labor migration. Even far-right parties have gained traction by framing immigration as a cultural or security threat, reflecting broader anxieties about social change.
Despite these debates, comprehensive national engagement on immigration strategy remains limited. Civil society organizations like the Solidarity Network with Migrants Japan (SMJ) actively advocate for migrant rights and policy reform, but their influence on formal policy remains constrained.
This lack of broad, structured deliberation means that immigration policy is often shaped through top-down political negotiation rather than inclusive public engagement. As a result, public opinion tends to be reactive and fragmented, susceptible to rhetoric rather than informed dialogue. In a country where immigration intersects with pressing issues like labor force sustainability, regional revitalization, and human rights, Japan may benefit from mechanisms that allow citizens to deliberate beyond partisan frames.
5. Why Citizen Deliberation Matters for Japan
Introducing citizen assemblies or deliberative forums into immigration policy discussions could offer several advantages:
Enhancing Policy Legitimacy and Public Trust
Deliberative processes signal that the government is genuinely interested in citizens’ informed perspectives—not just election-driven sound bites. In an era where public trust in governance and democratic institutions is challenged globally, these methods provide space for citizens to engage meaningfully, listen to different viewpoints, and contribute to policy direction.
Balancing Technical Complexity with Social Values
Immigration policy involves deep trade-offs—economic demand for foreign workers, social integration, demographic sustainability, and cultural identity. These are not purely technical decisions; they are value judgments that benefit from informed public input. Citizen assemblies help contextualize these dilemmas in ways that traditional opinion polling cannot.
Building Broader Consensus
By bringing diverse participants together, deliberative forums can highlight areas of shared concern and potential compromise, helping bridge divides that otherwise manifest in polarized political discourse.
Strengthening Civic Capacity
Japan’s existing mini-publics demonstrate untapped civic energy. Scaling up such engagement to national issues could cultivate a culture that values evidence-based dialogue and shared problem-solving.
6. The Need for a Long-Term National Vision
However, public deliberation alone is not a panacea. Effective immigration governance requires a long-term national strategy—one that answers the question: What kind of country does Japan want to be 30, 50 years from now?
Without a clear vision, policy becomes reactive, piecemeal, and subject to short-term political pressures. A national strategy would articulate Japan’s demographic and economic goals, the role of international talent, integration frameworks, social infrastructure needs, and human rights commitments. This strategic foundation should guide immigration policy, rather than ad hoc debates or populist rhetoric.
Citizen deliberation could play a pivotal role in shaping that long-term vision. Instead of treating immigration as a reactive issue, Japan could frame it as an opportunity to engage its citizens in shaping the country’s future identity. Public deliberation ensures that a long-term strategy reflects not just expert assessments but also the values and priorities of citizens across regions and generations.
7. Policy Recommendations for Japan
Drawing from the UK example and Japan’s deliberative potential, several recommendations emerge:
1. Establish National Deliberative Forums
Japan could institutionalize periodic citizen assemblies on major national issues, including immigration, aging, labor policy, and social integration.
2. Integrate Deliberation into Formal Policymaking
Outcomes from citizen assemblies should be formally considered in parliamentary debates and legislative drafting, ensuring that public input influences decisions.
3. Expand Public Deliberation Literacy
Public education campaigns and civil society partnerships could increase awareness of deliberative democracy, fostering a culture of informed dialogue.
4. Anchor Immigration Policy in a Long-Term Vision
Develop an overarching national strategy for migration that aligns with Japan’s demographic, economic, and cultural objectives—grounded in both expert analysis and citizen input.
8. Conclusion: Democracy, Deliberation and the Future
The UK’s citizens’ assembly-style approach to immigration highlights a broader democratic innovation—one that seeks to re-connect citizens with policy decisions through informed, respectful, and structured dialogue. For Japan, where immigration policy is increasingly salient amid demographic transformation, similar approaches could enhance public trust, enrich policy discourse, and build consensus for long-term national strategies.
Importantly, citizen deliberation should not be treated as an isolated experiment but as a continuous commitment to participatory governance—one that evolves Japan’s democracy to meet 21st-century challenges. By combining deliberative practices with a clear national vision, Japan can foster more resilient, inclusive, and forward-looking immigration and social policies that reflect the will and welfare of the people it serves.