Table 1. Open in new tab Substantial...

	Period	Proposals	Proposals per year
Intermediate phase	1984–8	5	1.0
Second debate	1989–93	11	2.2
Intermediate phase	1994–8	1	0.2
Third debate	1999–2003	19	3.8
2004–8	34	6.4
Intermediate phase	2009–13	8	1.6
Fourth debate	2014–8	21	4.2

	Period	Proposals	Proposals per year
Intermediate phase	1984–8	5	1.0
Second debate	1989–93	11	2.2
Intermediate phase	1994–8	1	0.2
Third debate	1999–2003	19	3.8
2004–8	34	6.4
Intermediate phase	2009–13	8	1.6
Fourth debate	2014–8	21	4.2

Table 1.

Substantial reform proposals in immigration policy, 1984–2018.

	Period	Proposals	Proposals per year
Intermediate phase	1984–8	5	1.0
Second debate	1989–93	11	2.2
Intermediate phase	1994–8	1	0.2
Third debate	1999–2003	19	3.8
Third debate	2004–8	34	6.4
Intermediate phase	2009–13	8	1.6
Fourth debate	2014–8	21	4.2

	Period	Proposals	Proposals per year
Intermediate phase	1984–8	5	1.0
Second debate	1989–93	11	2.2
Intermediate phase	1994–8	1	0.2
Third debate	1999–2003	19	3.8
Third debate	2004–8	34	6.4
Intermediate phase	2009–13	8	1.6
Fourth debate	2014–8	21	4.2

Note: The data from 1984 to September 2007 is based on the list of substantial proposals in the research material prepared by the National Diet Library (NDL 2008). This list does not include all immigration policy proposals. For example, Shimada (1993) lists 36 reform proposals from 1989 to March 1993, but only eleven of those are in the NDL list. The criteria for identifying the substantial reform proposals are not explained in NDL (2008), but the authors seem to have weighted three criteria for their selection: (1) the political influence of the actors producing the report; (2) innovative content of the proposal; (3) size of the report. Based on these criteria, the substantial reform proposals from October 2007 to 2018 have been identified and included in the list.

Source: NDL (2008) and own compilation.

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only