As anyone who’s ever looked into the prospect of studying abroad at anything beyond the idle daydream level can attest, it’s not cheap. Aside from the travel expenses involved to simply get to another country, there’s the cost of finding housing, coping with a new lifestyle in a place where you may not know budget-friendly places to eat and shop for essentials, and, of course, the cost of tuition, which sometimes comes with the burden of extra fees for international students.
And yet, many who have done it will say that studying abroad, even on a short-term program, can be a life-changing experience that broadens your horizons and opens up enriching career paths that you may have otherwise never even knew existed, much less follow for yourself. Among the proponents of studying abroad, even with the costs involved, is Tokyo mayor Yuirko Koike, who has announced a plan for the Tokyo metropolitan government to start handing out grants to students who want to study abroad.
Koike, who spoke about the initiative on Jan 12, said that the amount of financial support students receive would be dependent on a variety of factors, including the cost of living in their host countries and the length of their study abroad program. For those on short programs, roughly one to four months, a maximum total grant of 900,000 yen would be possible to pay for travel on tuition expenses, while those on year-long programs could receive as much as 3.15 million yen, which could include a monthly allowance of 150,000 yen for “local activity expenses,” ostensibly cultural and extracurricular activities outside the standard classroom curriculum.
To be eligible, applicants must have Japanese nationality (i.e. must be Japanese citizens), have a parent or guardian who lives in Tokyo, and be enrolled in a domestic university or technical college/vocational school. In other words, the aim of the program is to help students who are already pursuing academic goals to study overseas. In addition, the grants will be for students applying to study at overseas universities, so they can’t be used for language schools. Koike also says that there will be no upper family income eligibility limit for applicants.
The proposed grant system comes at a time when there’s a growing sense that young people in Japan are showing less interest and initiative in going abroad than previous generations did, coinciding with a plummeting value of the yen that’s making studying abroad an economically daunting endeavor even for those who are interested. At the same time, Japan’s aging population and other macroeconomic factors are most likely going to make a global outlook of elevated importance for professionals in Japan in the years to come. “Japan’s international competitiveness is falling” said Koike in discussing the program, adding “We need to accelerate investment in our young people and quickly produce human resources that can contribute globally.”
Koike’s vision is for the program to initially provide grants for 500 short-term study abroad participants and 100 mid/long-term ones, with the first group departing for their overseas experiences in the summer of next year.
Source: Nitele News via Hachima Kiko
Read more stories from SoraNews24.
-- Want to study abroad in Japan but short on funds? The Freeman-ASIA program might be able to help!
-- Japanese university globalizes with fall start date, governor wants English as official language
-- Tokyo makes high school free for all families, even the rich ones
- External Link
- https://soranews24.com/2025/01/15/tokyo-governor-wants-to-start-study-abroad-grant-system-includes-monthly-activity-allowance/
50 Comments
Login to comment
tora
And what of young people in other prefectures? They are usually worse off in economics terms than Tokyoites and have access to far less resources and chances for international exposure in general. If such a system is introduced, it should be at the national level.
But I actually suspect an ulterior motive here with Tokyo planning to lure even MOtE young people to the capital. This and other welfare policies for Tokyoites will just sweeten the dangling carrot with the result an acceleration of the centralisation of human resources to the capital.
Mr Kipling
So the tax payer is to fund student holidays? They must be running out of ideas to waste money.
sakurasuki
Before increasing study abroad grants, any news on effort to improve Japanese people English ability, language that Japanese people really struggle when they live abroad.
wallace
Two young people I know have returned from the US after 3 years at university paid for by their families. Both speak near-perfect English. One of them is returning for a Masters degree next year.
maxjapank
This is great. I know quite a few students who want to study abroad, but with the weakened yen, it's just impossible. I've often thought the government should provide scholarships to help.
That's a good point. I do know that my prefecture offers ten 500,000 yen scholarships to high school students who meet certain grade requirements. Problem is that the English test (IELTS) is so much more difficult now that most of the high school students in my prefecture are unable to pass it.
I know that having a good ability of English is important to having a successful exchange. But I've had many students go abroad with less ability and then come back being near fluent. Those students have also pursued careers using English now, and much of that is due to the year abroad they experienced. I think that the those in charge of the IELTS have partly lost vision fo what Exchange Programs are intended for.
asdfghjkl
Any effort to decrease the burden of further education costs to Japanese and local residents rather than paying foreign students to come and study in Japan. Most countries charge more to foreign students.
Jordi Puentealto
Definitely not something that a “local” authority should do with the “local” taxpayer money. They should instead perhaps lower “that” person’s local taxpayers burden upon proof of graduation.
P_C
Naysayers will be naysayers.
Koike-san push hard on this one, it's a great idea. Japan must cultivate multiple, innovative ideas and plans for the future of the country's welfare.
Geeter Mckluskie
The mayor of Tokyo isn't responsible for what happens or doesn't happen in other prefectures.
Rakuraku
wallaceToday 07:35 am JST
Nice, but this costs around 30 million (including accommodation and other expenses). Not everyone can afford it. This is why any help will be welcomed, even if it only covers a fraction of the cost.
virusrex
The complain is not that Tokyo should do something but that someone (like the national government) should, related to this is the deep imbalance between big cities (specially Tokyo) and the rest of the country, since this is openly considered a national problem then it is justified to say something should be done that would lessen the concentration of people an resources instead of increasing it.
shogun36
Is it going to be a "Japanese grant" where the student has to pay it back?
Or an actual grant where they get the money just for studying?
Ricky Kaminski13
This is actually a great idea and incentive to at least appeal to this young generation to get out and experience planet gaikoku. The price of the yen, the psychology of this crop of university aged students, the low wages and economic stagnation have had a disastrous effect on the youth, who now show little drive or interest to seek adventure, set sail overseas and internationalize.
Koike is smart for realizing the massive loss of potential, for the entire nations future, if young adults all decide to just turn inwards in a collective show of disinterest of the outside world.
Geeter Mckluskie
Cities that struggle for whatever reason will hold less and less sway for their residents and as a result will pass on into history for good reason. Those that thrive will also do so for good reason. Japan is currently downsizing...for good reason...it is only around 35% self-sufficient in terms of feeding itself, and most forecasts point to 50% of current jobs being rendered obsolete within the next two decades or sooner. "The rest of the country" either needs to up its game or move to Tokyo.
virusrex
Fortunately people are not as ready as just give up things of unmeasurable value as you are and they complain and demand for inequalities to be corrected instead. Tokyo is not downsizing, and sacrificing the country to support a few cities is not productive nor something the Japanese population is interested in.
Also, lacking self-suficiency can be "solved" by two general approachs, increasing self sufficiency or letting people starve out, it should be obvious that Japan do not see as "progress" letting two thirds of the population die to have enough national resources to feed everybody, instead it is looking to increase national production to stop depending on other countries as much as right now. Rational people will easily see the second approach leads to much better outcomes.
Geeter Mckluskie
No one is "sacrificing the country". The country is adjusting to a change in demographics and and economy that doesn't require unsustainable population growth.
Japan is focused on building its digital infrastructure as it adjust to the new digital economy...one that doesn't rely on unsustainable population growth (in a nation that is currently @ 35% self-sufficient in terms of feeding itself).
https://www.japan.go.jp/kizuna/2022/01/vision_for_a_digital_garden_city_nation.html
This has led to more companies setting up satellite offices in more rural areas that provide their employees with a better work-life balance that doesn't involve 2 hour commutes.
The country is not "being sacrificed"...It's downsizing as a natural course of the changing dynamics vis a vis the economy and the declining birthrate
SDCA
This is encouraging. When I have my child, I would love for the opportunity to send them to a university abroad. Little things like this help, and hopefully this extends past Tokyo.
SDCA
A lot of jobs are already rendered obsolete, especially the silver jobs and, ahem, city ward office jobs. The reason why they exist is to lower unemployment and allow for pensioners/ house parents/ etc to earn a supplementary income.
virusrex
That is what you recommend, for "cities to pass on into history" if they can't compete with the deeply biased support big cities are receiving. According to you everybody not in a big city should simply disappear since their contributions to the country are not worth keeping according to you, and then pretend this will somehow correct the lack of self-sufficiency, as if Tokyo was the source of all the food in Japan.
Irrelevant for your claim, there is a huge problem of support being directed towards few places, that do not depend at all on population growth, that is a claim you are trying to use this as if it was a defense of your argument that any place that is not where money is flowing should simply be left to starve and things would be fine, that is not the case at all. You are actively recommending for anything that is not a huge city now to be disregarded as non important and expect this to increase self reliance in food, which makes no sense, specially because people are not going to go to satellite offices when their families are going to have much less support than the families of colleagues that remain in Tokyo.
kohakuebisu
Dunno about this. There will be more needy people in Tokyo. Or people doing unprofitable stuff that relates to traditional culture, arts etc. who its good to support. There are plenty of near worthless university programs in other countries. The UK sees foreign students as easy money to be packed in in a "get bums on seats" manner, not as demanding customers who must be given a high quality education and value for money.
However, I also feel that complaints about the "local taxpayer" should also take into account all the locals who send their taxes to Hokkaido or somewhere to get some free crab, free beef, free ski lift passes etc. under furusato nouzei. So its all quite distant from the idea of paying local taxes locally and getting a plethora of useful and properly allocated community services in return. That's what my vision of local government should be.
Geeter Mckluskie
Disapear? No. What I'm suggesting is that the national government need not prop up failing businesses that will only continue to fail for whatever reason they have in the first place, just as they need not prop up depopulated towns that scatter the Japanese rural landscape. Those that hold sway for whatever reason will continue to exist. Chichibu, for example had a population of 78,000 in 1950 at its apex. It now has a population of 58,000, yet it still has a viable economy with its cobble-stone streets still vibrant with mom and pop shops still in operation, rather than the dilapitated towns propped up by the bubble economy such as Minakami that went all in on building large hotels and a tourist industry that was unsustainable. Chichibu's streets are brand new with newly made sidewalks, public washrooms etc. It has Chichubu cement and Mitsubishi heavy industries, as well as a thriving textile industry in both silk and indigo fabrication plants. It has a thriving tourist industry that attracts elderly tourists from Tokyo who want to hike the low-lying mountains and experience the traditional atmosphere in its countless restaurants among which only MacDonalds' and Johnathans are chain restaurants. Chichibu's economy thrives due to its local efforts, rather than relying on the national government to pad its coffers. Those are the towns that will have pull and sway to those looking to esacpe the megalopolis hive life of the major cities like Tokyo or Osaka. And those that don't will pass on into history...until their location appeals to people wanting to live and set up shop there. The point being it needs to be organic rather than forced through government intervention.
gaijintraveller
Maybe the reason young people such as university students are less interested in going abroad is that the ¥1,000 per hour they get for a part-time job does not go nearly as far as it did in the late 1980s and 1990s.
virusrex
Yes, your own words "pass on into history for good reason" you never suggested anything to avoid this and instead consider it something desirable and that would magically solve the problems that happen precisely because of the lack of support.
Which again is equivalent to giving up on a problem and pretending that solved it. People that actually solve the problems think more about what can be done to correct an imbalance instead of making it worse by giving up before trying anything.
How much of the food is produced in Chichibu? would this used as an example of places outside of Tokyo solve the lack of self-sufficiency or make it worse? what is it was 3 or 4 hours farther from Tokyo, do you think you could keep using it as an example? because everything is necessary for this to be a solution at the national level, it is easy to see how it is not.
Being lucky enough to reap some of the benefits that rain into Tokyo because of its locations do absolutely nothing to demonstrate this is not possible for most of the country, nor is a model to follow nationally to solve self-sufficiency.
Geeter Mckluskie
My words were that the towns that hold no sway and are not viable should disappear...not the people.
The people should either make their towns more viable and an attractive option in which to live...or move to a place that is viable and attactive, rather than rely on government intervention to prolong their demise.
Some key words that may help your reading comprehension: towns people move
Take note as to how I've used them before assigning things I've not said to me.
Thanks
zulander
Its a nice idea but I can't help but think there are many other projects to finance that would be of greater importance.
virusrex
That is still completely unproductive, negative and would not solve any problem, which is why nobody that is actually reasonable suggest it as a solution, only you.
Which according to you involves letting the big cities monopolize resources in greater and greater measure every year, which makes no sense.
Something that in Japan is making the problems worse, specially the lack of alimentary self-sufficiency, something that you recognized as a problem but that would be much worse if people listened to what you suggest.
Letting towns disappear is what makes your suggestions unproductive and the opposite of a solution, that people move out of those towns to the big cities do absolutely nothing to reduce this complete contradiction that you are trying to wave off as unimportant when in fact proves the suggestion is counterproductive.
Geeter Mckluskie
The big cities resources are commensurate with their populations from whom they draw their revenues.
Yes. I suggest that the government invest in "alimentary self-sufficiency", which could include incentives for farming such as subsidising heavy machinery and offering free tuition in agricultural sciences as well as free plots of land on which to grow food. For a place like Minakami this makes little sense as it's mountainous, non-arable land. The Minakami's of Japan need to pass on into history. There only sway is one of a tiny local nostalgia that is of no interest or use to anyone but a handful of people who would be better off somewhere more vialble in Japan. There are plenty of places outside of Tokyo that can survive and thrive in a downsized Japan that could be more efficient and self-sufficient than now.
virusrex
And still a huge problem according to Japan, that wants to correct this unbalance precisely because it makes the national problems worse, exactly the opposite of what you suggest.
Which means doing precisely what you said should not be done "rely on government intervention" by this you are recognizing that your suggestion would make things worse and doing the opposite of what you have been suggesting until now. There is exactly zero requirement to focus on each single specific location to say that national support for places outside of big cities is the actual answer, not letting all those small towns, villages, etc. disappear because they are not collecting as much taxes as Tokyo.
At the end even you suggest the solution is to make the government support smaller locations, which in the context of this article means also giving as much incentive for people to live there as the government of Tokyo is doing locally, I mean, your own words are "offering free tuition..."
Geeter Mckluskie
I don't see the problem.
Yes " not rely on government intervention to prop up failing businesses or otherwise useless dying towns"
Instead...the government should invest in that which is crucial...food production and supporting towns and regions to that end.
Mr Kipling
Hopefully they pay it back. Why should others be paying for some twenty year olds "jolly junket" trip abroad. If there is any benefit from such a trip, those benefitting should be paying for it.
>
wallace
It is not easy getting into a top-level American university.
The US is the top destination for Japanese students studying abroad, with 14,444 students in 2023.
Followed by Australia
The second most popular destination for Japanese students studying abroad, with 12,221 students in 2023.
Yubaru
Really not a bad idea! Get rid of mandatory English education altogether! Throw it away. Make it a 100% elective system and let the students who want to study it, learn it!
Oh and along the way, trash MEXT's way of teaching Engrish and go back to the ways of teaching "Jack and Betty", those folks who learned it "that" way, learned the right way, and still speak English to this day.
virusrex
So either the people that run the country have no knowledge about it and lie when they explain how this is a problem, or some nameless person on the internet that offers contradicting advice is wrong and can't see an obvious problem, it should be easy to see which side is in the wrong here. I mean, even you suggested measures for people to leave big cities, you are seeing it as a problem just not accepting you do.
Except when the business is about producing food, in that case you contradict yourself and become all for it, even if that means saving dying towns that are useless except for that specific industry. It is all perfectly clear.
Which is a wide variety of things, without which it is realistically impossible to pretend people will jump at the chance of going away from Tokyo that has everything into the rest of the country that has nothing else to do but to produce food. A very myopic and unrealistic way to "solve" problems.
Cosell
Google translate?
BertieWooster
So where does the money come from for this "brainwave?"
rocketpig
Just buy 1 less F16
jib
They should only be used for language schools.
Geeter Mckluskie
I see a government that is being short-sighted in its assessment of a situation whereby they want more money as soon as possible for their coffers. All forecasts point to AI and mass-automation rendering 50% of current jobs obsolete within the next 20 years or less. The government is clamouring for immigration to fill their coffers now while not taking into account the likelihood that the bulk of those immigrants will end up on the dole and thereby exacerbate the strain on those very coffers. Politicians tend to think in terms of now, while mortgaging the future. An economic model that relies on unsustainable population growth needs an upgrade in approach, especially in a time when 50% of current jobs will no longer be there within the next 20 years. Rather than spending efforts on quick fixes that will only end up exacerbating the strain on the public coffers, the government needs to focus on how to best approach a downsized population that is more in line with actual trends in employment as well as sustainability in terms of food production.
Geeter Mckluskie
They should be used for technology and agricultural science.
virusrex
From the taxes of everybody that lives and works in Tokyo, which is becoming more and more of the population in Japan, the problem is that this means other locations are left with less and less resources.
Something that is still completely unrelated to the problems that come from the over concentration of the population in Tokyo, something very easy to see since you are unable to address any of the arguments that refute your suggestions and demonstrate they would only make the problems worse. You are still trying to avoid addressing them by making up something that is irrelevant, the population could grow, stay or drop, but as long as more and more of the people ends up living in big cities it would still be a problem.
Thus demonstrating that your previous claim that any place that is not able to be profitable should be left to die and disappear is completely wrong. Unless you think big cities like Tokyo should be converted in agricultural spaces to apply all that technology and science.
Geeter Mckluskie
There are plenty of places in and around Tokyo that could be converted into agricultural development spaces...plenty. "The Kanto Plain" ring a bell?
Resources for what? Simply staying afloat and offering nothing...unable to generate any financial resources on their own?
Not so. If more viable options are available, ones that don't require 2 hour commutes and the stress of living in an overcrowded megalopolis, then more and more viable options will be sought out by those who prefer to lead a better work-live balanced existance.
Those places that hold no sway and have no potential other than one of demise...should pass on into history, certainly.
More and more people WILL end up living in big cities. However, the big cities will have become smaller due to the levelling out of the population. What needs to be done is incentivising young people to take up farming by subsidizing heavy machinery (which is a huge obstacle in taking on such a vocation), offering free plots of land and focusing education on agricultural sciences. By doing so, farming communities will increase and around them towns will become more viable. Long term problems require long term solutions, not knee-jerk responses such as throwing money at dying towns.
virusrex
Enough to offset the low self reliability of Japan? not at all, not even from Tokyo, specially since you suggest every small city to disappear since they will not produce economic gains in the scale possible in Tokyo, you are still suggesting to make the problems bigger. Who is going to those "plenty of places" as well, after all the support is going to those living IN Tokyo according to your suggestions.
To exist, the problem is that for you if they don't offer economic flow at the scale of Tokyo they become "nothing".
Completely so because if the trend of over concentration continues it would be irrelevant if the population grows, stagnates or is reduced it would still cause the current problems to increase. You keep suggesting for the resources that make Tokyo more attractive to everybody to be used exclusively in Tokyo, so those "viable options" become less desirable since they are (again) not going to get anything but what they produce, which will be nothing. Your suggestion is that those places should disappear since they are only convenient, not productive.
Which again you measure with the all mighty and only criteria of economic production, even food production would mean losing money.
Specially when they believe there is nothing of value apart from money, which of course will make worse all the problems that are currently just barely manageable. This is why people are arguing and working to solve this trend to actually reduce the problems and solve the lack of self sufficiency.
wallace
I live about 600 km west of Tokyo on the Seto Inland Sea in a city large by land size but not so large by population but a good community with many young children and 13 schools. Most people live in large houses with gardens. Great seaside and countryside. Farming and fishing are major industries. No one here would want to live in Tokyo or any other city like it.
Geeter Mckluskie
Who said anything about "the scale of Tokyo"? Let's concede that Chichibu with a population of 58,000 does not "offer economic flow at the scale of Tokyo", yet is a viable community with it's own economy.
A better work-life balance that doesn't involve 2 hour commutes is of great value.
Move to Minakami which is a veritable ghost town if you think economic production isn't a huge factor in a city or town's viability. I doubt you would move to such a town. Why? It holds no sway other than the nostalgia felt by its few remaining residents.
Geeter Mckluskie
You can't eat money and you can't buy food if there is none. So "losing money" is an odd way to frame things.
Japan is surrounded by hostile neighbors. If there were a geo-political conflict its shipping lanes could be cut off, in which case Japan would experience famine within weeks. Let's concede that food production is worth the money invested, rather than dismiss it as "losing money". Losing money would be throwing away money on dying towns that offer nothing but a pang of nostaligia for their few remaining residents.
Geeter Mckluskie
B-I-N-G-O!
virusrex
You are the one saying that big cities should keep concentrating people, apparently because you believe places that are close by can support all the needs of the city, even if nobody would want to live and work on those places because they would not have the support those living inside the big cities will enjoy. You are the one making this claim.
Because of the huge spillover from Tokyo, I already challenged you to defend the city being 3 hours farther and being equally productive and you choose not to address that argument.
Chichibu is also very far from being self sufficient, it depends on having resources being produced on places that your suggestions would eliminate for not being economically productive enough and that require a lot of support from the central government, support that is possible because it takes from big cities to give to other places.
Which again means (to you) that the center of Tokyo would easily outweigh anything outside of the city, specially when the families would have access to a lot of things not available elsewhere, cheaper schools, free overseas study, better hospitals, etc. etc. This is precisely the important part of the problems now, "better work-life balance" do exist right now, and people are still flooding the big cities and leave food production places to die, which you say is desirable and good.
You are the one saying this, not me. According to you if a city absorbs the population of small places (something that is currently happening) that is justifiable. How many Tokyo cities can Minakami support?
Congratulations, you have finally beginning to understand why your suggestion to let places die if they can't produce money like big cities do is not a solution at all. The next step is realizing that big cities supporting the rest of the country to offset the imbalance they are causing (and hopefully to revert that imbalance) is what actually will make life easier for everybody, including people living in the big cities.
You understand that farming and fishing are not industries that let those working there live in large houses with gardens right?
Geeter Mckluskie
Yes they most certainly are!
kurisupisu
Tokyo gets bigger and richer whilst Tokyoites suffer from pollution, cramped conditions and higher prices-a vicious circle.
What happens when a massive quake hits Tokyo?
Everything in one place and everybody lured by greed and money.
This is exactly what is happening right now-towns and people are slowly fading outside the capital.
Of course, the domestic food supply is decreasing too.
The right action to take would be to scrap tax on domestically produced food and invest more in agricultural science and technology.