JGSS-2008 Social Capital and Tolerance toward Foreigners in Japan: Analysis of JGSS-2008 Emi OOKA School of Sociology Kwansei Gakuin University The goal of this paper is to explore how tolerance towards foreigners in Japan is associated with two different forms of social capital, network variety in occupations and participation in voluntary associations. Based on analyses of a national sample of 2,160 individuals from the JGSS-2008, the results showed that network variety works differently for male and female. For male, associating with a wider variety of white-collar occupations is associated with more tolerant attitudes. On the other hand, with individual attitudes controlled, association with people of various working-class occupations is positively associated with women s tolerance. Participation in all kinds of voluntary associations is not positively associated with tolerance. Only those who are involved in volunteer associations and sports associations showed a more tolerant attitude. Though the most consistent and strongest factor associated with tolerance is having any acquaintance with a foreign background, the study shows that we should pay more attention to a varying network-mediated process affecting tolerance. Key Words: JGSS, tolerance, social capital JGSS-2008 JGSS 129
1. 2005 200 2008 15 2006 3 1997 2006 2009 49.2 25.8 35.2 2009 2010 2007 2010 2001; 2007 2000; 2001 Côté and Erickson 2009 Putnam 2000 Stolle and Rochon 1998; Cigler and Joslyn 2002; Côté and Erickson 2009 Iglic 2010 130
2. 2.1 ネットワークの多様性 (Network Variety) と寛容さへの影響 2001; 2007 2008 1997 2000 2001 Erickson 1996 2 131
Côté and Erickson 2009 1 2 2 1-1 1-2 2.2 2000 Putnam 1993 dark side Putnam and Goss 2002:11-13 Ciger and Joslyn 2002:18-19) 1998 Stolle and Rochon 1998 Ciger and Joslyn 2002) 1995 NPO PTA 132
Ikeda and Richey 2009) Iglic 2010 2 3. 3.1 2008 10 12 JGSS-2008 20 89 2 A B B 4220 B 2160 B 60.6 3.2 2 Côté and Erickson 2009 JGSS-2008 2000; 2001 1 0 SSM 8 4 2008 1 1 2 133
1 n 45.5 54.5 231 58.5 41.5 508 62.5 37.5 546 63.4 36.6 741 59.9 40.1 2,026 2 =25.819 (p<.01) JGSS-2008 2 10 2009 SSM 1995 1 2 2 JGSS-2008 10 2 1 2 1 4 1 2 4 1 2 (1) 2 10 1 2 1 0.286 0.297 2 0.749 0.106 3 0.721 0.146 4 0.512 0.228 5 0.605 0.258 6 0.360 0.379 7 0.091 0.466 8 0.167 0.602 9 0.151 0.701 10 0.251 0.565 2.042 1.774 20.42 38.16, Kaiser 134
1 0 JGSS-2008 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 8 Ciger and Joslyn 2002; Ikeda and Richey 2009 1 8 / 3 n=1,004 n=1,156 5.0 2.6 13.2 4.4 8.4 8.2 2.6 2.0 7.2 8.8 22.3 14.8 12.8 17.3 11.8 24.4 4. 4.1 4 1 5 1 135
4.2 4 2 2009 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7-0.019** -0.020** -0.020** -0.021** (0.005) (0.005) (0.005) (0.005) 0.000-0.142-0.065-0.179 (0.156) (0.169) (0.161) (0.172) -0.769** -0.649** -0.753** -0.656** (0.233) (0.243) (0.239) (0.247) -0.853** -0.677** -0.826** -0.691** (0.24) (0.253) (0.246) (0.257) -0.422+ -0.143-0.478+ -0.290 (0.250) (0.271) (0.261) (0.280) 0.125* 0.113* 0.110* 0.090* (0.050) (0.055) (0.052) (0.056) -0.110* -0.090-0.112* -0.102+ (0.052) (0.055) (0.054) (0.057) 0.531** 0.489** 0.512** 0.448** (0.151) (0.157) (0.155) (0.161) -0.243-0.121-0.245-0.091 (0.328) (0.335) (0.355) (0.362) -0.312-0.298-0.275-0.229 (0.212) (0.223) (0.228) (0.239) 0.654* 0.821** 0.345 0.493 (0.272) (0.282) (0.294) (0.305) 0.165 0.162 0.405 0.524 (0.445) (0.466) (0.508) (0.539) 0.063 0.120 0.155 0.151 (0.277) (0.288) (0.301) (0.311) 0.416** 0.361* 0.299+ 0.265 (0.166) (0.171) (0.176) (0.179) -0.027 0.065 0.022 0.146 (0.215) (0.224) (0.223) (0.233) 0.108 0.088 0.125 0.125 (0.212) (0.216) (0.222) (0.226) 1.211** -0.608** -0.473 0.945** 0.713* -0.652** 0.994** (0.329) (0.139) (0.086) (0.367) (0.341) (0.145) (0.379) n 941 871 932 861 921 860 850 Cox & Snell R 2 0.035 0.026 0.019 0.055 1.191 0.037 0.064 ** 1 * 5 + 10 136
5 2 1 4.3 4 3 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7-0.027** -0.024** -0.029** -0.026** (0.004) (0.005) (0.005) (0.005) 0.381** 0.260+ 0.312* 0.261 (0.151) (0.164) (0.156) (0.168) -0.242-0.303-0.286-0.340 (0.234) (0.250) (0.244) (0.257) -0.149-0.242-0.186-0.260 (0.255) (0.276) (0.266) (0.286) -0.090-0.042-0.149-0.099 (0.226) (0.246) (0.237) (0.256) 0.056 0.000 0.047-0.020 (0.052) (0.057) (0.054) (0.059) 0.050 0.117* 0.062 0.129* (0.055) (0.058) (0.056) (0.060) 0.868** 0.706** 0.893** 0.691** (0.144) (0.151) (0.148) (0.154) -0.520-0.390-0.702-0.507 (0.460) (0.474) (0.476) (0.486) 0.200 0.106 0.126 0.090 (0.322) (0.344) (0.347) (0.364) 0.470+ 0.459+ 0.276 0.303 (0.249) (0.259) (0.263) (0.271) 0.780 0.711 0.955 0.803 (0.540) (0.578) (0.599) (0.635) 0.125 0.269 0.125 0.251 (0.249) (0.260) (0.266) (0.276) 0.197 0.178 0.126 0.125 (0.186) (0.193) (0.200) (0.203) -0.090 0.132-0.103 0.073 (0.181) (0.192) (0.197) (0.207) 0.077-0.020 0.053-0.023 (0.153) (0.160) (0.166) (0.171) 0.958** -0.849** -0.504** 0.494 1.051** -0.884** 0.570** (0.311) (0.117) (0.081) (0.349) (0.326) (0.124) (0.362) n 1,066 976 1,047 964 1,034 951 939 Cox & Snell R 2 0.065 0.047 0.01 0.087 0.075 0.054 0.095 137
1.4 1.3 10 NPO 2 3 4 5 4.4 4 2 4 4 2 4 1 138
4.5 4 5 5 4 3 5 10 4.6 6 5. 1 2 2009 3 139
JGSS-2008 JGSS 3 Acknowledgement General Social Surveys JGSS JGSS 1 0-4 Cigler, Allan, and Joslyn, Mark R., 2002, The Extensiveness of Group Membership and Social Capital: The Impact on Political Tolerance Attitudes, Political Research Quarterly 55: 7-25. Côté, Rochelle R., and Erickson, Bonnie H., 2009, Untangling the Roots of Tolerance: How Forms of Social Capital Shape Attitudes Toward Ethnic Minorities and Immigrants, American Behavioral Scientist 52: 1664-1689. Erickson, Bonnie, 1996, Culture, Class and Connections, American Journal of Sociology 102(1): 217-251. Iglic, Hajdeja, 2010, Voluntary Association and Tolerance: An Ambiguous Relationship, American Behavioral Scientist 53(5): 717-736. Ikeda, Ken'ichi, and Richey, Sean, 2009, The Impact of Diversity in Informal Social Networks on Tolerance in Japan, British Journal of Political Science 39: 655-668., 1997, 64: 61-73., 2000,., 2001,., 1997,., 2008,. 140
, 2010, 20 http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/22/01/ icsfiles/afieldfile/2010/01/29/1289270_1_1.pdf (2010.9.28)., 2008, JGSS-2003 General Social Surveys 7: 259-270., 2009,. Putnam, R.D., 1993, The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life, The American Prospect 13: 35-42. Putnam, R. D., 2000, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Simon and Schuster, New York. Putnam, R. D., and Goss, Kristin, 2002, Introduction, Putnam, R. D. [ed.], Democracies in flux: The Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society, Oxford University Press, New York, 3 21., 2006, http://www.soumu.go.jp/kokusai/pdf/ sonota_b6.pdf (2010.9.25). Stolle, Dietlind, and Rochon, Thomas R., 1998, Are All Associations Alike? American Behavioral Scientist 42(1): 47-65., 2007,., 2001, 76: 83-95., 2009, Works Review 4: 114-125. 141